https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456276 Delhi HC held that condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act requires a fact-sensitive, satisfactory explanation, and routine or vague departmental statements are insufficient even for the State. An explanation that papers and court-fee arrangements took time, without particulars or convincing cause, was treated as unsatisfactory; the Court rejected a blanket liberal approach for mechanically delayed appeals and stressed that habitual administrative negligence and cyclostyled explanations do not justify indulgence. The delay was not condoned, and the land acquisition appeal was treated as barred by limitation. en-us Fri, 02 Dec 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jul 2024 15:45:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456276 Delhi HC held that condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act requires a fact-sensitive, satisfactory explanation, and routine or vague departmental statements are insufficient even for the State. An explanation that papers and court-fee arrangements took time, without particulars or convincing cause, was treated as unsatisfactory; the Court rejected a blanket liberal approach for mechanically delayed appeals and stressed that habitual administrative negligence and cyclostyled explanations do not justify indulgence. The delay was not condoned, and the land acquisition appeal was treated as barred by limitation. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 02 Dec 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456276