I.A.(Civil)/1242/2020 of FATEMA BIBI Vs AKHTAR ALI AND 7 ORS on 15 March 2026

ORDER

Date : 16.03.2026 Heard Mr. M. Hossain, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. D. Kalita, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and 6.

2. By way of the present petition, the petitioner seeks condonation of a delay of 75 days in filing the connected Regular Second Appeal.

3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 21.09.2019 passed by the learned First Appellate Court. The connected Regular Second Appeal, however, came to be filed only on 13.03.2020, resulting in a delay of 75 days, for which the present application has been filed seeking condonation.

4. Mr. M. Hossain, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the delay occurred due to circumstances beyond the control of the petitioner and is primarily attributable to her poor financial condition.

5. Mr. D. Kalita, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, fairly submits that he has received no instructions to oppose the prayer for condonation of delay.

6. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the materials available on record.

7. During the pendency of the present application, respondent No. 5 (Saifulla Sk) expired, and his legal heirs have been substituted as respondent Nos. 5(a) to 5(g).

8. The grounds explaining the delay, as stated in the application, may be summarised thus: the petitioner is a widowed woman belonging to a below poverty line category and has no independent source of income. Though she has two sons, they are daily wage labourers and are barely able to maintain their own families. The petitioner herself has been suffering from ailments requiring medical treatment. Owing to strained relations with certain relatives and her precarious financial condition, she was unable to immediately arrange the funds necessary for filing the appeal and travelling to Guwahati.

9. It is further stated that after considerable hardship and with assistance from distant relatives, the petitioner managed to arrange some money and came to Guwahati on 03.03.2020, whereupon she handed over the case records to learned counsel. The appeal was thereafter prepared and filed on 13.03.2020.

10. Upon consideration of the explanation offered, it appears that the delay has primarily occurred due to the petitioner’s financial constraints and personal circumstances. The law of limitation, though founded on public policy, does not intend to foreclose the remedy of a litigant where sufficient cause is shown and where the explanation appears bona fide.

11. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is satisfied that the explanation offered constitutes sufficient cause within the meaning of the law governing condonation of delay. The delay does not appear to be deliberate or attributable to negligence or inaction.

12. Accordingly, the delay of 75 days in filing the connected Regular Second Appeal stands condoned.

13. Let the connected Regular Second Appeal be registered and numbered and thereafter be placed before the appropriate Bench.

14. In the Regular Second Appeal, the Registry shall reflect the correct name of learned counsel for the petitioner as Mr. M. Hossain, Advocate. JUDGE Comparing Assistant