https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465318 Section 5 of the Limitation Act requires sufficient cause for not filing within the entire period of default up to the date of filing, not merely after limitation expires, and the explanation must cover the full delay. A condonation order is discretionary, but appellate interference is justified where the discretion is exercised on irrelevant, arbitrary, perverse, or legally untenable grounds. On the facts, a delay of 3966 days in filing a second appeal was not supported by bona fide sufficient cause; gross administrative lethargy and internal official inaction did not justify extension of limitation. The order condoning delay was set aside and execution of the decree was allowed to proceed. en-us Fri, 12 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Dec 2025 18:58:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465318 Section 5 of the Limitation Act requires sufficient cause for not filing within the entire period of default up to the date of filing, not merely after limitation expires, and the explanation must cover the full delay. A condonation order is discretionary, but appellate interference is justified where the discretion is exercised on irrelevant, arbitrary, perverse, or legally untenable grounds. On the facts, a delay of 3966 days in filing a second appeal was not supported by bona fide sufficient cause; gross administrative lethargy and internal official inaction did not justify extension of limitation. The order condoning delay was set aside and execution of the decree was allowed to proceed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 12 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465318