Application for condonation of delay
Full Text
(1) When an appeal is presented after the expiry of the period of limitation specified therefor, it shall be accompanied by an application supported by affidavit setting forth the facts on which the appellant relies to satisfy the Court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within such period.
(2) If the Court sees no reason to reject the application without the issue of a notice to the respondent, notice thereof shall be issued to the respondent and the matter shall be finally decided by the Court before it proceeds to deal with the appeal under rule 11 or rule 13, as the case may be.
(3) Where an application has been made under sub-rule (1), the Court shall not make an order for the stay of execution of the decree against which the appeal is proposed to be filed so long as the Court does not, after hearing under rule 11, decide to hear the appeal.
Plain English Summary
Mandates that any time-barred appeal must be accompanied by a formal application supported by affidavit demonstrating 'sufficient cause' under Section 5 Limitation Act, prohibits interim stay of execution until delay is condoned, and requires notice to respondent before condonation.
Key Legal Elements
- Mandatory Delay Condonation Application: Time-barred appeal must be accompanied by application supported by affidavit.
- Pre-Admission Adjudication: Limitation issue must be decided under sub-rule (2) before the appeal can be heard on admission under Rule 11.
- Notice to Respondent Mandatory: Delay cannot be condoned ex parte behind the back of the decree-holder respondent.
- Absolute Bar on Stay of Execution (Sub-rule 3): Court has no jurisdiction to stay execution of decree until delay is formally condoned and appeal is admitted.
- Inserted by 1976 CPC Amendment: Streamlined Section 5 Limitation Act practice in civil appeals.
Practical Note
Primacy of Delay Adjudication & Jurisdictional Bar on Stay: 1. Non-Filing Not Incurably Fatal — State of M.P. v. Pradeep Kumar (2000) 7 SCC 120: The Supreme Court held that while Rule 3A is mandatory in form, omitting to file the delay application at the time of presenting the appeal memorandum is a curable irregularity. The court can grant time to file the application subsequently, and the appeal is treated as properly filed once the application is lodged. 2. Jurisdictional Bar under Sub-rule (3): The court has NO jurisdiction to grant an interim stay of execution so long as the delay is not condoned and the appeal is not admitted for hearing under Rule 11. Any stay granted prior to condoning delay is illegal.
हिंदी पाठ
(1) जब कोई अपील उसके लिए विनिर्दिष्ट परिसीमा-काल की समाप्ति के पश्चात प्रस्तुत की जाती है, तब उसके साथ एक ऐसा आवेदन संलग्न होगा जो उन तथ्यों को अधिकथित करने वाले शपथपत्र द्वारा समर्थित होगा जिन पर अपीलार्थी न्यायालय का यह समाधान करने के लिए निर्भर करता है कि उसके पास ऐसी अवधि के भीतर अपील न करने के लिए पर्याप्त हेतुक (Sufficient cause) था।
(2) यदि न्यायालय प्रत्यर्थी (Respondent) को सूचना जारी किए बिना आवेदन को खारिज करने का कोई कारण नहीं देखता है, तो प्रत्यर्थी को उसकी सूचना जारी की जाएगी और मामले का न्यायालय द्वारा अंतिम रूप से विनिश्चय इससे पूर्व किया जाएगा कि वह यथास्थिति नियम 11 या नियम 13 के अधीन अपील पर कार्यवाही करने के लिए अग्रसर हो।
(3) जहां उप-नियम (1) के अधीन कोई आवेदन किया गया है, वहां न्यायालय उस डिक्री के निष्पादन के स्थगन का कोई आदेश तब तक नहीं करेगा जिसके विरुद्ध अपील दायर की जानी प्रस्थापित है, जब तक कि न्यायालय नियम 11 के अधीन सुनवाई के पश्चात अपील की सुनवाई करने का विनिश्चय न कर ले।