- (1.) The Court: Certain submissions made on behalf of the applicant when the application for condonation of delay was taken up for consideration have prompted us to take a closer look at the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act and its application to the application and appeal filed by the applicant.
(2.) In order to appreciate the submissions made, the provisions of section 5 of the aforesaid Act are reproduced hereinbelow: Extension of prescribed period in certain cases: Any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the Court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period.
(3.) Mr. Dipak Deb, learned counsel, appearing in support of the application, submitted before us that in making an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act a party was not required to explain the cause of delay within the period prescribed by limitation and that it had consistently been held by the Courts, and in particular the Hon'ble Supreme Court, that such explanation was required to be given only in respect of the last day on which the appeal was required to be filed and thereafter. According to Mr. Deb, since the law of limitation allows a litigant to file an application or an appeal within a particular period, no explanation is required to be given for the period comprising such period and that having regard to the wording of section 5 of the aforesaid Act the cause of delay only for the period after the prescribed period of limitation was required to be explained.;