In Brief
The appellants sought to appeal a judgment ex parte decree passed in 2012, but filed the appeal 349 days late. They claimed they first learned of the judgment through a police constable in May 2013. The trial court, First Appellate Court, and High Court all rejected their delay-condonation application, finding their explanation false—documentary evidence showed they had earlier attended hearings and even mentioned the judgment in separate proceedings in November 2012. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal, holding that false factual averments and negligence in pursuing a long-pending suit do not warrant condonation of delay. The appeal was dismissed with no costs.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.