https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183734 Extraordinary delay in refiling requires a specific, credible and bona fide explanation for the entire period; where the explanation is vague, unsupported and rests mainly on blame to previous counsel, condonation is inappropriate. Later payment of court fee relates back to the original presentation under Section 149 CPC, and the absence of a contemporaneous application under Order XLI Rule 3A CPC does not automatically defeat the appeal filing. On the facts pleaded, however, the delay of 1727 days remained unexplained, the party showed gross negligence and lack of diligence, and no sufficient cause for condonation was established. The order condoning delay was therefore held unsustainable and the delayed appeals were rejected. en-us Wed, 20 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:01:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183734 Extraordinary delay in refiling requires a specific, credible and bona fide explanation for the entire period; where the explanation is vague, unsupported and rests mainly on blame to previous counsel, condonation is inappropriate. Later payment of court fee relates back to the original presentation under Section 149 CPC, and the absence of a contemporaneous application under Order XLI Rule 3A CPC does not automatically defeat the appeal filing. On the facts pleaded, however, the delay of 1727 days remained unexplained, the party showed gross negligence and lack of diligence, and no sufficient cause for condonation was established. The order condoning delay was therefore held unsustainable and the delayed appeals were rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 20 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183734