LAWS(J&K)-2011-2-7

STATE OF J&K Vs. MUKHTAR AHMAD NATHKHAN

Decided On February 04, 2011
State of JAndK And Ors. Appellant
V/S
Mukhtar Ahmad Nathkhan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 31/3/2006 passed by the Court of Principal District Judge, Budgam, where-under application seeking condonation of delay in preferring the appeal has been dismissed, the revision petition is proposed to be filed after a considerable delay of about three years (i.e. 1043 days), so again instant application for condonation of delay.

(2.) For condonation seeker has to show a ''sufficient cause'' for inaction. The word ''sufficient cause'' as employed in Section 5 of the Limitation Act has to be liberally construed so that substantial justice may not become the casualty but for such liberal construction the exercise of discretion is not so unfettered so as to render the object of limitation laws as redundant or a dead letter. Seeker of the condonation of delay cannot claim immunity when with impunity indolence is exhibited. Every action has a limit and in case limits are crossed, that would attract the applicability of proverb ''excess of everything is bad''.

(3.) Law of limitation at time has to be applied even if it may operate harshly. Instant case presents a worst example of casualness and indolence on the part of seeker of condonation of delay.