Authority: High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital

Order Date: 09.07.2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellants – M/s Zaz Sons Export Pvt. Ltd and another; Respondent – Akhil Kumar Gupta.
  • Original Suit: Filed by the respondent for recovery of Rs.85,868.65 plus interest; judgment and decree dated 03.04.2001 (originally referenced as 03.04.2005 in the appeal record).
  • Appeal: The appellants intended to appeal the decree but delayed filing; a delay‑condonation application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, was filed together with the memo of appeal on 19.10.2005.
  • Grounds for condonation: (a) death of the appellants’ counsel, Mr. M.P. Awasthi, on 15.04.2001; (b) appellant No.2, Tahir Hussain, claimed prolonged ill‑health since 1995, supported by a medical certificate dated 24.09.2005 for his father, Zahid Hussain, issued by Prof. S.C. Manchanda, Senior Consultant Cardiologist, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi.
  • Respondent’s objections: Denied the relevance of the advocate’s death and the alleged illness; asserted that no medical certificate for Tahir Hussain or death certificate for Mr. Awasthi had been filed.
  • Lower Court Order: The VI Additional District Judge, Dehradun dismissed the condonation application on 01.10.2014 (R.M. No.745 of 2005).
  • Questions of Law: Initially three questions framed on 26.11.2019, later replaced on 01.05.2025, and a fourth question added on 29.10.2025 concerning jurisdiction of the Civil Court at Dehradun versus exclusive jurisdiction under a Purchase Order for courts at Kanpur.

Final Outcome

  • The High Court held that the lower court did not adopt a liberal approach required under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and therefore set aside the 01.10.2014 order.
  • The delay‑condonation application is allowed.
  • The matter is remanded to the first appellate court to decide the appeal on its merits.
  • On the second substantial question, both parties agreed that dismissal of the first appeal as barred by time amounts to confirmation of the decree; no further deliberation was required.
  • The third and fourth substantial questions, which touch upon the merits and jurisdiction, were left for the first appellate court after remand.
  • The parties are directed to appear before the District Judge, Dehradun on 04.08.2026.

Topics: Delay Condonation, Limitation Act, Civil Procedure