Condonation of delay denied where no sufficient cause was shown and counsel's omission was treated as attributable negligence.

Delay condonation requires a sufficient cause or other insuperable circumstance explaining late filing of the appeal. A delay of about 16 months was not excused because the applications did not disclose any adequate explanation, and the omission by the appellant's chartered accountant to file the appeal was treated as negligence attributable to the appellant. In the absence of a basis for favouring discretion, the delay was not condoned and the applications were dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned.

Analysis: The applications for condonation disclosed a delay of about 16 months and did not set out any sufficient cause or insuperable circumstance explaining the failure to file the appeals within time. The omission of the appellant's chartered accountant in preferring the appeal was treated as negligence attributable to the appellant, and no basis was shown for exercising discretion in its favour.

Conclusion: The delay was not condoned and the applications were dismissed.

---