Condonation of delay in separate benami appeals accepted where prior timely appeal and administrative transitions explained the filing gap.

Delay in filing separate appeals under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act was condoned where the earlier joint appeal had been filed in time, later dismissed with liberty to refile separately, and the subsequent delay was explained by transfer of the Initiating Officer, appointment of a new officer, and consultation with the Special Public Prosecutor. The court treated the matter as delay in complying with the direction to file separate appeals, not complete inaction, and regarded the explanation as sufficient. The separate appeals were therefore treated as within limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of 50 to 200 days in filing separate appeals under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 should be condoned.

Analysis: The application for condonation of delay explained that the earlier joint appeal had been filed within time, that it was later dismissed with liberty to file separate appeals, and that the delay in filing those separate appeals occurred because of transfer of the Initiating Officer, the arrival of a new officer, and the time taken for consultation with the office of the Special Public Prosecutor. The Court held that these circumstances sufficiently explained the delay and that the case was not one of complete inaction, but of delay in complying with the direction to file separate appeals after liberty had already been granted.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned and the appeals were treated as within limitation.

---