Delay condonation requires sufficient cause; an inordinate and poorly explained delay will not be excused.

Delay condonation under the Limitation Act depends on disclosure of sufficient cause on the facts of each case. A liberal approach may be taken where the explanation is acceptable, but an inordinate and inadequately explained delay will not qualify for relief. On the stated facts, a 445-day delay in filing the revenue appeal was found to be unjustified, the explanation was held unsatisfactory, and the delay was not condoned; the appeal was treated as time barred.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of 445 days in filing the revenue appeal deserved condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Analysis: The delay was held to be inordinate, and the explanation offered for the belated filing was found unsatisfactory. The governing principle is that condonation depends on the existence of sufficient cause, which must be shown on the facts of each case. While a liberal approach may be adopted in appropriate matters, an extended and inadequately explained delay does not merit condonation.

Conclusion: The delay was not condoned and the appeal was held to be time barred.

---