State of HP v. Atma Ram & Ors.

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant: Mr. Diwakar Dev Sharma, Addl. Advocate General. For the Respondents: Mr. Bhupender Gupta, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Harshit, Advocate. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral). The Appellant, by filing this appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, CPC), has assailed the judgement and decree dated 10.04.2023, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kinnaur at Rampur , District Kinnaur, HP in Civil Misc. Petition No.6-R/6 of 2020, whereby an application under Section 5 of Limitation has been dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 08.07.2019, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Rampur BSR, District Shimla, HP, in Civil Suit No.164/2013, were affirmed.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgments.

The present Regular Second Appeal is being heard on the following substantial question of law:- “i. Whether there existed sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the first appeal.” 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? YES 2

The suit, in the case at hand, was decided on

08.07.2019. Thereafter, the appeal was preferred before the learned First Appellate Court on 17.02.2023. In filing of the appeal, in the case at hand, admittedly there is a delay of approximately 90 days. The reason for the delay in the case at hand is the bureaucratic delay, which have been detailed in para 6 of the impugned judgment.

In the filing of the appeal before the learned First Appellate Court, there is a delay of about 90 days. The same has been duly explained in the application filed for condonation of delay. Even otherwise, while dealing with an application for condonation of delay filed by the State, one has to be conscious the bureaucratic delays, impersonal nature of governmental functioning, institutional interest and hence a justice oriented liberal approach has to be taken while dealing with such applications. In this respect, it would be appropriate to refer to decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court passed in State of Manipur and others vs. Koting Lamkang, 2019 (10) SCC 408. The relevant extract of the same is being reproduced herein below:- “7. But while concluding as above, it was necessary for the Court to also be conscious of the bureaucratic delay and the slow pace in reaching a government decision and the routine way of deciding whether the State should prefer an appeal against a judgment adverse to it. Even while observing that the law of limitation would harshly affect the party, the Court felt that the delay in the appeal 3 filed by condoned. the State, should not be

Regard should be had in similar such circumstances to the impersonal nature of the Government’s functioning where to act individual officers may responsibly. This in turn, would result in injustice to the institutional interest of the State. If the appeal filed by State are lost for individual default, those who are at fault, will not usually be individually affected”.

Other than the aforesaid, it would also be appropriate to refer to judgment dated 09.10.2023, passed in Civil Appeal No.5867 of 2015 titled Sheo Raj Singh (deceased) through LRs. and others vs. Union of India and another. The relevant extract of the same is being reproduced herein below:- As Having bestowed

37. serious consideration to the rival contentions, we feel that the High Court’s decision to condone the delay on account of the first respondent’s inability to present the appeal within time, for the reasons assigned therein, does not suffer from any error warranting interference. aforementioned judgments have shown, such an exercise of discretion does, at times, call for a liberal and justice-oriented approach by the Courts, where certain leeway could be provided to the State. The hidden preventing an appeal by the State being presented within the prescribed period of limitation so as not to allow a higher court to pronounce upon the legality and validity of an order of a lower court and thereby secure unholy gains, can hardly be ignored. Impediments in the working of the grand scheme of governmental functions have to be removed by taking a pragmatic view on balancing of the competing interests.

. that are at work forces 4

In view of the aforesaid facts and attending circumstance, the delay in filing the present appeal before the learned First Appellate Court is condoned. Impugned judgment and decree dated 10.04.2023 passed by the learned First Appellate Court is set aside. The appeal before the learned First Appellate Court’s is restored and to be decided on merit.

8. Parties are directed to appear before the learned First Appellate Court on 04.11.2025. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 24th September, 2025 (Gaurav Rawat/TB)