High Court of Gujarat

THAKOR (BHATOMA) MAFAJI NAGARAJIversusOMA RAM S/O UDA RAM JAT (CHAUDHARY)

Disposal: 53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE
Bench: HASMUKH D SUTHAR

Holding

The delay of 183 days was condoned as sufficient cause was shown under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

Summary

The petitioners filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 183‑day delay in filing their appeal. The respondents were served but one did not appear. The court examined the reasons for delay set out in paragraphs 4‑9 of the petition and found them satisfactory. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in N. Balakrishnan v. N. Krishnamurthy (AIR 1998 3222), the judge held that the delay could be condoned. Consequently, the application for condonation was allowed, permitting the appeal to proceed.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 183 days in filing an appeal can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act?

Legislation cited

Limitation Acts. 5

Subjects

condonation of delayLimitation ActSection 5appealcivil procedure

Judgment

         C/CA/1644/2025                                                 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2026




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
     R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1644 of 2025
                         In F/FIRST APPEAL/6823/2025
 ==========================================================
                 THAKOR (BHATOMA) MAFAJI NAGARAJI & ORS.
                                     Versus
               OMA RAM S/O UDA RAM JAT (CHAUDHARY) & ANR.
 ==========================================================
 Appearance:
 KAASH K THAKKAR(7332) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
 FRESH RULE SERVED(4513) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
 RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
 ==========================================================
    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                                           Date : 03/02/2026
                                            ORAL ORDER

 1.       Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. Though
 served, none appears for respondent No.2.


 2.       This application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation
 Act for condonation of delay of 183 days caused in filing the
 appeal on the ground mentioned in para 4 to 9 of the
 application.


 3.       Having heard the learned advocates for the respective
 parties and considering the averments made in this application,
 it appears that sufficient cause is made out to condone the delay
 and in view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in
 the case of N. Balakrishnan vs. N. Krishnamurthy, reported in
 AIR 1998 3222, therefore, the delay of 183 days as explained
 by the learned advocate for the applicant is considered. The
 application is accordingly allowed.


                                                                    (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
 ALI




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ISTAYAK ALI(HC01093), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 03/02/2026 14:24:25




                                               Page 1 of 1

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "condonation of delay"Sign in to search