Appeal dismissed for delay in filing, financial incapacity not accepted as justification. Withdrawal not condonation.

The appeal was dismissed due to the inordinate delay in filing it, as the court found the reasons provided for the delay insufficient. The appellant's financial incapacity and legal troubles were considered but did not justify the delay. The court clarified that the withdrawal of the review petition did not imply condonation of the delay in filing the appeal. As a result, the appeal was dismissed without addressing the merits of the case, and the application for condonation of delay was also rejected. No costs were awarded.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Dismissal of application for exemption from payment of court fee.
2. Dismissal of the original petition due to non-payment of court fee.
3. Delay in filing the appeal and its condonation.
4. Legal implications of the withdrawal of the review petition.
5. Financial incapacity and its impact on the proceedings.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Dismissal of Application for Exemption from Payment of Court Fee:
The appellant filed an application under Order XXXIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking exemption from the requirement of payment of court fee on the grounds of being an "indigent person." The order dated 4th October 2013 dismissed this application and required the appellant to deposit the court fee within two weeks. Failure to do so resulted in the dismissal of the original petition (OMP 375/2013).

2. Dismissal of the Original Petition Due to Non-Payment of Court Fee:
The appellant failed to deposit the required court fee within the stipulated period, leading to the automatic dismissal of OMP 375/2013. The dismissal was challenged in the present appeal, which was filed significantly late.

3. Delay in Filing the Appeal and Its Condonation:
The appeal was filed with a delay of 3 years and 192 days. The appellant sought condonation of this delay, attributing it to unavoidable circumstances affecting the directors of the appellant company. The court examined the reasons provided, including the directors' legal troubles and imprisonment, but found the explanations insufficient. The appellant had also been active in other legal proceedings during the same period, undermining the claim of incapacity to file the appeal on time.

4. Legal Implications of the Withdrawal of the Review Petition:
The appellant had previously filed a Review Petition (19/2015) against the order dated 4th October 2013, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 30th October 2015. The appellant argued that the liberty granted to withdraw the review petition implied condonation of the delay. However, the court clarified that no such condonation was implied or granted. The delay in filing the review petition itself remained unexplained.

5. Financial Incapacity and Its Impact on the Proceedings:
The appellant's financial incapacity was highlighted as a reason for not meeting the liability and suffering proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Despite this, the court emphasized that the statute of limitation serves to prevent perpetual litigation threats and must be adhered to. The appellant's inability to deposit the awarded amount further weakened its position.

Conclusion:
The court held that no sufficient cause was shown to justify the condonation of the inordinate delay in filing the appeal. Consequently, CM 11185 of 2017 for condonation of delay was dismissed, leading to the dismissal of the appeal on the grounds of delay without addressing the merits of the case. There was no order as to costs.

---