https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286061 Mistaken legal advice may constitute sufficient cause for condoning delay where the litigant acted bona fide and without negligence. The Court treated the question whether an appeal lay against dismissal of an election petition as debatable, noted no material suggesting an oblique purpose in pursuing the writ remedy, and accepted the appellant's explanation that he was prepared to furnish security if an appeal was required. On that basis, the advice received was regarded as a possible and bona fide view, sufficient to extend time for filing the appeal under the proviso to section 116A(3) of the Representation of the People Act. en-us Fri, 18 Apr 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:19:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286061 Mistaken legal advice may constitute sufficient cause for condoning delay where the litigant acted bona fide and without negligence. The Court treated the question whether an appeal lay against dismissal of an election petition as debatable, noted no material suggesting an oblique purpose in pursuing the writ remedy, and accepted the appellant's explanation that he was prepared to furnish security if an appeal was required. On that basis, the advice received was regarded as a possible and bona fide view, sufficient to extend time for filing the appeal under the proviso to section 116A(3) of the Representation of the People Act. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 18 Apr 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286061