TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 387
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has filed a complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) against the respondent for committing offence under Section 138B of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (for short "the NI Act") read with Section 420 of I.P.C. stating that the accused/ respondent had given cheque No. 179576 dated 27.01.2012 drawn onState Bank of India, Branch- Gevra Project, Korba for Rs. 40,000/-, which was dishonoured by Oriental Bank of Commerce, Korba on account of insufficient balance and information in this regard was received by the petitioner/complainant on 25.06.2021. Hence, the accused has committed offence under Section 138B of the NI Act. As per provision of Section 138 of the NI Act, the petitioner sent a legal notice to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 03.05.2013. He applied for certified copy of the order passed by this Court on 25.07.2013 which was received by him on 31.07.2013. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing of criminal revision before this Court, he enquired about status of the case from his counsel, then he has informed on 03.12.2013 that the revision petition has been dismissed with liberty in favour of him to file revision petition before learned Sessions Judge. As such, the delay in filing the revision petition is bonafide and the same deserved to be condoned by the revisional court, also that the revision petition may be decided on merits. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re is sufficient ground for condonation of delay and the petitioner has properly explained the delay of 226 days in filing the revision petition. 9. It is well settled by the Supreme Court that there cannot be any rigid ground to be held with sufficient cause for condoning the delay. The basic parameter for treating the reasons as sufficient cause is whether by not filing the case within the stipulated time framed right of any party is adversely affected. 10. The Supreme Court in catena of decisions has held that the Courts should adopt a liberal and justice-oriented approach for condoning the delay. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter bein....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the rights of parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics, but seek their remedy promptly. The object of providing a legal remedy is to repair the damage caused by reason of legal injury. The law of limitation fixes a lifespan for such legal remedy for the redress of the legal injury so suffered. Time is precious and wasted time would never revisit. During the efflux of time, newer causes would sprout up necessitating newer persons to seek legal remedy by approaching the courts. So a lifespan must be fixed for each remedy. Unending period for launching the remedy may lead to unending uncertainty and consequential anarchy. The law of limitation is thus founded on public policy. It is enshrined in the maxim i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of mala fides. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact he runs a serious risk. 6. It must be grasped that judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so." 13. Similarly, it is also well settled by the Supreme Court that the condonation of delay must be on bonafide reason without any ulterior motive or any deliberately manner on the part of the litigant then only the delay in filing the application before the Court should be entertained. Now coming to the facts of the case in hand, it is apparent that the petitioner was willing to prosecu....