In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court has emphasized that in the absence of a set limitation period for filing an appeal, it must be done within a reasonable time, determined by the unique circumstances of each case.
“In the absence of any particular period being prescribed to file an appeal, the same would be governed by the principle of ‘reasonable time,’ for which, by virtue of its very nature, no straitjacket formula can be laid down and it is to be determined as per the facts and circumstances of each case,” stated the bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol.
The court maintained that it is inappropriate for the judiciary to impose its own limitation when none has been specified by the legislature, especially without considering the specifics of each case.
CASE BACKGROUND
The case involved M/S North Eastern Chemicals Industries (P) Ltd. (“Appellant”) supplying goods to M/S Ashok Paper Mill (Assam) Ltd. and another (“Respondents”). The Respondents, declared a “sick company” under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1935, saw governmental intervention through the Jogighopa (Assam) Unit of Ashok Paper Mills Limited (Acquisition Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1990 (“Jogighopa Act”).
The Appellant filed a claim under Section 16 of the Jogighopa Act, seeking Rs. 1,58,375/- along with interest. The Commissioner of Payments awarded the principal sum but denied interest. Subsequent legal proceedings and appeals ensued.
SUPREME COURT DECISION
The Supreme Court deliberated on whether an appeal from the Commissioner of Payments could be entertained in the absence of a prescribed limitation period. Referring to previous judgments, the court highlighted that courts should be cautious about prescribing specific time limits when the legislature has not done so.
The court outlined factors for consideration in such cases, including the conduct of parties, nature of the proceeding, length of delay, possibility of prejudice, and the statute’s scheme. It emphasized that parties raising delay concerns bear the burden of demonstrating additional prejudice.
The ruling emphasized that appeals filed without a specified time frame, as in this case, remain maintainable. The decision underscores the court’s commitment to evaluating each situation individually, ensuring justice prevails over rigid timelines.
This verdict has allowed the appeal of M/S North Eastern Chemicals Industries (P) Ltd.& Anr. against M/S Ashok Paper Mill (Assam) Ltd. & Anr.
