COVID-19 illness cannot justify unexplained pre-pandemic delay in filing an appeal.

01Facts

The appellant sought condonation of a 2,937-day delay in filing an appeal against the judgment and preliminary decree in a partition suit, dated 30 October 2014.

p. 5

She attributed the delay to suffering from COVID-19 and being hospitalised, after which she obtained a certified copy and filed the appeal.

p. 5

The Court noted that the pandemic began in 2020 and that the affidavit did not explain the earlier six-year period of inaction.

pp. 5–6

It also noted that connected appeals against the same judgment had been dismissed on 6 April 2026.

pp. 5–6

02Issues

i.1. Whether the appellant had shown sufficient cause to condone the 2,937-day delay in filing the appeal.

p. 6

ii.2. Whether the stated COVID-19 illness and hospitalisation explained the appellant’s failure to appeal during the six years preceding the pandemic.

p. 6

03Law Applied

The petition was brought under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Original Side Rules read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

p. 5

The Court applied the principle that delay is not condoned as a matter of right: the applicant must establish sufficient cause. Although courts may adopt a liberal approach, the reasons offered must be true and justifiable.

p. 6

No precedent was cited in the order.

p. 6

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Section 151

04Reasoning

The Court found that the asserted illness could not explain the delay as a whole: the judgment was delivered in 2014, whereas the COVID-19 pandemic began in 2020.

p. 6

The appellant had taken no steps to appeal during the intervening six years, and her affidavit contained no explanation for that period.

p. 6

The Court therefore held that sufficient cause had not been established; the dismissal of connected appeals was an additional circumstance noted by the Court.

p. 6