High Court of Gujarat

PADMABEN SHAILESHKUMAR BARIA (HEIRS OF DECD. SHAILESHKUMAR LAXMANSINH BARIA)versusMAHESHKUMAR JESINGBHAI BARIA

Disposal: 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
Bench: HASMUKH D SUTHAR

Holding

The court held that the 74‑day delay is condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

Summary

The petitioners filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 74‑day delay in filing a cross‑objection, alleging they could not arrange the required court fees in time. The first appeal in the matter was already pending before the court. The court examined the reasons for delay and, relying on the precedent set in N. Balakrishnan v. N. Krishnamurthy (AIR 1998 3222), found that sufficient cause existed to justify condonation. Consequently, the court allowed the application and granted the condonation of delay. The order was pronounced by Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar of the Gujarat High Court.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 74 days in filing a cross‑objection can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Whether the reason of inability to arrange court fees constitutes sufficient cause for condonation.

Legislation cited

Limitation Acts. 5

Subjects

condonation of delayLimitation ActSection 5cross objectioncourt feesfirst appealGujarat High Court

Judgment

              C/CA/5658/2025                                                 ORDER DATED: 05/01/2026




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
           R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 5658 of 2025
                            In F/CROSS OBJECTION/35095/2025
                               In R/FIRST APPEAL/1586/2025
       ==========================================================
           PADMABEN SHAILESHKUMAR BARIA (HEIRS OF DECD. SHAILESHKUMAR
                                LAXMANSINH BARIA) & ORS.
                                           Versus
                         MAHESHKUMAR JESINGBHAI BARIA & ANR.
       ==========================================================
       Appearance:
       KAASH K THAKKAR(7332) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
       MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
       ==========================================================
          CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                                                Date : 05/01/2026
                                                 ORAL ORDER



       1.       Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.


       2.       This application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation
       Act for condonation of delay of 74 days caused in filing the cross
       objection on the ground that the applicant could not arrange the
       amount for payment of court fees in time.


       3.       Having heard the learned advocates for the respective
       parties and considering the averments made in this application
       and considering the fact that the First Appeal is already pending
       for adjudication, 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 74 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 05/01/2026 14:32:15


                                                     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