https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275577 The Court held that the Additional District Judge improperly condoned the delay in filing an appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. It emphasized the importance of demonstrating sufficient cause for condoning delay and highlighted the need for a detailed explanation of the delay period. The Court found that no sufficient cause was shown in this case, and the discretion to condone the delay was not judicially exercised. Consequently, the Court set aside the lower court's decision, emphasizing the requirement to establish sufficient cause as a condition precedent for the Court to exercise discretion under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. en-us Wed, 16 Dec 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Oct 2018 10:24:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275577 The Court held that the Additional District Judge improperly condoned the delay in filing an appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. It emphasized the importance of demonstrating sufficient cause for condoning delay and highlighted the need for a detailed explanation of the delay period. The Court found that no sufficient cause was shown in this case, and the discretion to condone the delay was not judicially exercised. Consequently, the Court set aside the lower court's decision, emphasizing the requirement to establish sufficient cause as a condition precedent for the Court to exercise discretion under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 16 Dec 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275577