SRIDEVI DATLA versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [2021] 13 S.C.R. 282 · Decided: 02-03-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: L. NAGESWARA RAO · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 13 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
282
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 13 S.C.R.
SRIDEVI DATLA
v.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 3136 of 2020)
MARCH 02, 2021
[L. NAGESWARA RAO AND S. RAVINDRA BHAT, JJ.]
Limitation Act, 1963: Applicability to Special laws – Held:
Where period of limitation are prescribed under special laws,
appeals that exceed the period granted in the special laws can be
entertained at the discretion of the tribunal and Limitation act would
not apply – National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
General Clauses Act – Applicability of,  to appeals filed under
the NGT Act – Held: s.10 of General Clauses Act stipulates when
the last date for doing something falls on a public holiday, the act
shall be considered as done, if it is done or taken on the next day
afterwards on which the Court or office is open – This provision
applies to all Central Acts enacted after the said Act was brought
into force – Therefore, s.10 applies proprio vigore to all appeals
filed under the NGT Act  – National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
National Green Tribunal Act, 2010: s.16 – Approach of the
Court in considering the application for condonation of delay –
The term ‘sufficient cause’ is relative, fact dependant, and has many
hues, largely deriving colour from the facts of each case, and the
behaviour of the litigant who seeks condonation of delay (in
approaching the court) – Appellant pleaded that since the
documentation attendant to the clearance granted to the Project
Applicant was voluminous, and expert as well as professional legal
advice of the kind necessary to approach the NGT was not available
in the State of Andhra Pradesh, the procuring of relevant documents,
and correspondence with counsel in Delhi and drafting of the appeal
entailed some delay – In approaching NGT, scientific or technical
support is necessary apart from expert professional legal advice –
Rejection of appeal by dismissing application for condonation of
delay, on the ground that no sufficient cause was shown, was
erroneous discretion of NGT – An appeal to the NGT in such matters
is no ordinary matter – The delay in filing the appeal before the
NGT is  condoned.
[2021] 13 S.C.R.282
282
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
283
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. There can be no dispute that the period of
limitation set out in a special law, which provides for remedies
and appeals, has to be construed in its terms and without
reference to the Limitation Act, if it contains specific provisions
delineating the time or period within which applications or appeals
can be preferred, and confines the consideration of applications
for condoning the delay to a specific number of days. Undoubtedly,
in such cases, the Limitation Act would be inapplicable. There
are several previous judgments of this court holding that where
periods of limitation are prescribed under special laws, appeals
that exceed the period granted and are within the extended period
of limitation in the special law, can be entertained at the discretion
of the tribunal, or court concerned and the Limitation Act would
not apply upon expiry of such extended period. This court held
that there is merit in the contention of the Union that the
provisions of the Limitation Act are inapplicable. [Para 18][293-
F-G; 294-A-B]
2. The appellant argues that the appeal is to be considered
as having been filed within the extended period of 60 days, since
the last (of the 60 days) was a Sunday (12.07.2020). The appellant
relied on Section 10 of the General Clauses Act, for this purpose.
Section 10 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 stipulates that when
the last date for doing something falls on a public holiday, the act
“shall be considered as done..” if it “is done or taken on the next
day afterwards on which the Court or office is open”. This provision
applies to all Central Acts enacted after the said Act was brought
into force. It is also noticeable that there is no indication in the
NGT Act that Section 10 of the General Clauses Act cannot be
applied. It is therefore, held that the provision applies proprio
vigore to all appeals filed under the NGT Act. [Paras 19, 20,
21][294-C-E; 295-A, C-D]
H.H Raja Harinder Singh v. S. Karnail Singh [1957]
SCR 208 – followed.
3. It is evident that the term sufficient cause is relative,
fact dependant, and has many hues, largely deriving colour from
the facts of each case, and the behaviour of the litigant who seeks
condonation of delay (in approaching the court). However, what
SRIDEVI DATLA v. UNION OF INDI

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.