N. Balakirshnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy [(1998) 7 SCC 123]: Supreme Court of India
Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion for condonation of a delay
9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a
matter of discretion of the court Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say
that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain
limit. Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the
only criterion. Sometimes delay of the shortest range may be uncondonable due
to want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases delay of very
long range can be condoned as the explanation thereof is satisfactory. Once the
court accepts the explanation as sufficient it is the result of positive
exercise of discretion and normally the superior court should not disturb such
finding, much less in reversional jurisdiction, unless the exercise of
discretion was on whole untenable grounds or arbitrary or perverse. But it is a
different matter when the first cut refuses to condone the delay. In such
cases, the superior cut would be free to consider the cause shown for the delay
afresh and it is open to such superior court to come to its own finding even
untrammeled by the conclusion of the lower court.