2007 (2) TMI 665 - HC - Central Excise

Court allows civil Revision Petition, emphasizes substantial justice over technicalities, directs Appeal for disposal.

ASSTT. COLLR. OF C. EX. & CUS., NAGAPATTINAM Versus MARIMUTHU

The Court allowed the civil Revision Petition, setting aside the order dismissing an application to condone a 131-day delay in filing an Appeal. ... - Issues involved: Challenge to the order of dismissal of Application in I.A. No. 187 of 1999 in unnumbered Appeal, declining to condone the delay of 131 days in filing the Appeal.Summary:The Revision Petition challenged the dismissal of an application to condone a 131-day delay in filing an Appeal. The suit was decreed on 27-2-1998, and the Appeal was filed with the delay. The Petitioner contended that the delay was due to the case records being mixed up in the office. The Court discussed the exercise of discretion under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, emphasizing the need for a justice-oriented approach rather than technical objections. Citing previous judgments, the Court highlighted the importance of substantial justice over technical considerations in condoning delays.The Court emphasized that delays in appeals should be condoned in the interest of justice unless there is gross negligence or deliberate inaction. It was noted that Government decisions involve procedural delays, and a liberal construction of 'sufficient cause' is necessary. The Court referred to previous cases where delays were condoned due to public interest and the unique functioning of Government departments. The Court stressed the need for a pragmatic and justice-oriented approach in such matters.Considering the facts of the case, the Court found the delay in filing the Appeal not unreasonable and held that the opportunity to pursue the Appeal should not be shut out. Consequently, the Impugned order was set aside, and the civil Revision Petition was allowed. The Principal District Judge was directed to take the Appeal on file for disposal in accordance with the law.