The Delhi High Court in ANIL KUMAR v. KISHAN SARRAF & ORS with reference to condonation of delay has observed that indolence, beyond a point, results in forfeiture of the right to secure justice.
The Court noted that the impugned order is being passed nearly after 3 years of it being passed and no reasoning has been given for the inordinate delay. The petition only pleads ‘different old age ailments’. Even after the delay in filing, a lack of interest in pursuing the petition has been shown by the petitioner. No one on the behalf of the petitioner has been appearing in the Court and it was only on the 4th January, 2022 (on the 5th hearing) that an appearance was made for the first time after filing the petition in 2019. It was noted that till date, the counsel has had no instruction from the client on how to proceed with the matter.
The Bench observed that “Indolence, beyond a point, results in forfeiture of the right to secure justice. The process of the court cannot be held at ransom, awaiting the convenience of the appellant……. This Court cannot afford to give unlimited adjournments to the appellant.
There being no reasonable explanation for the delay in preferring the present appeal, and learned Counsel being unable to assist the court in this regard, the appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay and non-prosecution.”
The court also noted that the appellant had not mentioned any specific ailment from which the appellant was suffering other than "different old ailments" as reasons for delay. The court said in this context that at the time of making the aforesaid averments, the appellant was 61 years of age, as per the affidavit filed with the application.
Thus, the court decision reiterated that if the delay is not proper and satisfactory, it will not condone the delay merely on the request of aggrieved parties.