Supreme Court dismisses Second Appeal due to delay, underscores need for justifiable cause.

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order condoning a delay of 1011 days in filing a Second Appeal, ruling that the respondents failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. Emphasizing the importance of diligence in legal proceedings, the Court dismissed the Second Appeal and allowed the appellant's appeal, highlighting the necessity of justifiable cause to condone delays.

---

---

Issues:
Delay condonation in Second Appeal filing

Analysis:
The appellant filed a civil suit for permanent injunction, which was initially dismissed by the Trial Court but later allowed by the First Appellate Court. The original defendants applied for a certified copy of the judgment and order after the First Appellate Court's decision. However, they waited for approximately 1011 days before preferring the Second Appeal before the High Court. The High Court, in an impugned order, condoned this significant delay, leading to the current appeal.

The appellant contended that the High Court erred in condoning the delay without sufficient cause being shown by the respondents. They argued that the delay was not adequately explained, especially for the period after a certain date. Citing various legal precedents, the appellant sought to set aside the High Court's order based on the lack of a justifiable explanation for the delay.

On the other hand, the respondents supported the High Court's decision, emphasizing that condoning the delay would allow for a fair consideration of the appeal on its merits. They argued that dismissing the appeal solely based on the delay would not serve the interests of justice. They urged the court to uphold the High Court's order and allow the appeal to proceed.

Upon thorough examination, the Supreme Court found that the High Court's decision to condone the delay of 1011 days was not justified. The Court noted that the respondents failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the prolonged delay in filing the Second Appeal. Referring to legal principles and precedents, the Court emphasized the importance of diligence and timely action in legal proceedings. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the High Court's order condoning the delay, and dismissed the Second Appeal filed by the respondents. The Court held that the High Court's decision was unsustainable both in law and on factual grounds.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order, dismissed the Second Appeal filed by the respondents, and allowed the present appeal. The Court emphasized the significance of timely legal actions and the need for a justifiable cause to condone delays in legal proceedings.

---