High Court of Gujarat

RAMANBHAI N. VANZARAversusANISA ANWAR MENDA

Disposal: 33-CA DISPOSED OF
Bench: HASMUKH D SUTHAR

Holding

The court held that the delay of 2601 days may be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, subject to the condition that no interest may be claimed for the delayed period.

Summary

The applicant filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 2601‑day delay in filing an appeal. The court examined the reasons for the delay as set out in paragraphs 9‑11 of the application. Relying on the precedent set in N. Balakrishnan v. N. Krishnamurthy (AIR 1998 3222), the court found that sufficient cause existed to condone the delay. Consequently, the application was allowed, but the court imposed a condition that the applicant cannot claim interest on any future award or compensation for the delayed period. No respondents appeared despite being served.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 2601 days in filing an appeal can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act
Whether the reasons provided constitute sufficient cause for condonation
Whether the applicant is entitled to claim interest on any award or compensation for the period of delay

Legislation cited

Limitation Acts. 5

Subjects

condonation of delayLimitation ActSection 5interestcivil appealhigh court

Judgment

         C/CA/4681/2025                                                 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2026




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
      R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 4681 of 2025
                          In F/FIRST APPEAL/26777/2025
  ==========================================================
                              RAMANBHAI N. VANZARA
                                        Versus
                           ANISA ANWAR MENDA & ORS.
  ==========================================================
  Appearance:
  NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
  NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
  NOTICE UNSERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3
  ==========================================================
     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.1 and 2.


  2.       This application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation
  Act for condonation of delay of 2601 days caused in filing the
  appeal on the ground mentioned in para 9 to 11 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 2601 days as explained
  by the learned advocate for the applicant is considered. The
  application is accordingly allowed subject to the condition that in
  the event any award or compensation is passed in favour of the
  applicant in future, the applicant shall not be entitled to claim
  interest for the aforesaid period.


                                                                    (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 14:15:35

                                                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