Supreme Court Restores Appeals Despite Delay, Citing Importance of Legal Questions; Appellant to Pay Costs. The SC set aside the Delhi HC's dismissal of appeals due to significant delays in refiling, which were 1110, 1117, and 991 days, respectively. The SC ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Supreme Court Restores Appeals Despite Delay, Citing Importance of Legal Questions; Appellant to Pay Costs.
The SC set aside the Delhi HC's dismissal of appeals due to significant delays in refiling, which were 1110, 1117, and 991 days, respectively. The SC acknowledged the importance of the legal questions involved and restored the appeals for reconsideration on merits. The appellant was ordered to pay Rs. 50,000 to the respondents in each appeal within four weeks as a condition for the HC to consider the merits. Additionally, a four-week period was granted to rectify any defects in the restored appeals. Pending applications were disposed of.
Issues involved: Condonation of delay in refiling appeals before the High Court due to inordinate delay.
Summary: The Supreme Court heard the appeal regarding the dismissal of appeals before the Delhi High Court due to significant delays in refiling. The High Court dismissed the appeals based on delays of 1110, 1117, and 991 days respectively, attributing it to the appeals being stuck in defects. The appellant argued that the substantial questions of law raised were not considered, causing prejudice to the Revenue, and requested the orders to be set aside for a fresh consideration on merits. The respondents opposed condoning the delays, stating that the blame on the Department's counsel was unjust as defects were not rectified by the appellant.
The Supreme Court noted that the High Court did not address the appeals on merits despite the significance of the questions of law. While acknowledging the considerable delays in refiling, the Court set aside the impugned orders, allowing the appeals and restoring them before the High Court with a cost of Rs. 50,000 to be paid by the appellant to the respondents in each appeal within four weeks. The Court emphasized that the High Court should not consider the appeals on merits until the costs are paid, ensuring the interest of justice. A four-week period was granted for rectifying any defects in the restored appeals before the High Court, and pending applications were disposed of.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI OCR ✕
of 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
