Liberal construction of sufficient cause justified condonation of inordinate delay where administrative lapse and public interest were shown

Inordinate delay in filing an appeal may still be condoned where the explanation shows bona fide administrative lapse and the record indicates action against responsible officers, especially if refusal would unjustly prejudice the public exchequer. Applying a liberal construction of "sufficient cause" to advance substantial justice, the Court accepted the explanation and exercised discretion in favour of condonation. The delay was therefore condoned on just terms, subject to payment of costs to the respondents within the time granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of 3081 days in filing the appeal should be condoned under the law of limitation.

Analysis: The delay was substantial, but the explanation disclosed administrative lapse by officials and the record showed that disciplinary action had been initiated against the erring officers. The compensation awarded by the court below had been enhanced substantially, and the Court considered that refusal to condone the delay would prejudice the public exchequer. Applying the settled principle that the expression "sufficient cause" must receive a liberal construction to advance substantial justice, the Court held that the facts justified exercise of discretion in favour of condonation, though on terms.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 13,500/- to the respondents within the time granted.

Final Conclusion: The delay petition succeeded and the appeal could be pursued, but only upon compliance with the cost condition imposed by the Court.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the explanation for delay shows bona fide administrative lapse, the Court may condone even inordinate delay if refusal would cause disproportionate prejudice to public interest, subject to just terms.

---