Court Rejects Covid-19 Pandemic as Sole Reason for Over Three Years Delay in Representing Plaint and Paying Deficit Court Fees, Labels Conduct as Abuse of Legal Process
In a significant judgment delivered on October 14, 2026, the Madras High Court (Division Bench) dismissed the Original Side Appeals filed by K.C. Selvam, Managing Director of M/s Kondan Construction Private Limited, against orders refusing to condone the extraordinary delays in representing the plaint and paying deficit court fees in a money recovery suit. The suit involved a substantial claim of approximately Rs. 2.5 crores against M/s Ramani Realtors (P) Limited, represented by its Chairman Mr. V.S. Venkatraman.
The appellant had initially filed a suit for recovery of dues arising out of a contractual dispute. However, the plaint was presented with a mere Rs. 10 court fee stamp, grossly insufficient for a claim of such magnitude where the required court fee was nearly Rs. 2.5 lakhs. The Registry returned the plaint, directing payment of the deficit court fee. Despite this, the appellant delayed representing the plaint for over three years and only paid the deficit court fee after a further delay, conduct that the Court found "callous, lethargic and shocking."
The appellant sought condonation of the delay on the grounds of the Covid-19 pandemic and inability to mobilize funds. The Court acknowledged that while the pandemic could constitute a sufficient cause in some cases, it emphasized that the appellant had failed to offer a "specific and satisfactory explanation" for the "enormous delay" of 1161 days in representing the plaint and 1181 days in paying the deficit court fees. The Court noted that vague references to the pandemic without detailed reasoning were inadequate.
The Division Bench upheld the orders of the Learned Master and the Single Judge dismissing the condonation applications, underscoring that the appellant's conduct amounted to an abuse of the judicial process, causing unnecessary harassment to the respondents and making a mockery of the legal system.
In light of the prolonged delay and frivolous litigation tactics, the Court imposed realistic costs of Rs. 25,000 on the appellant in each appeal, directing payment within six weeks. The Court cited Supreme Court precedents emphasizing that awarding costs must be pragmatic and designed to discourage abusive and frivolous litigation.
This judgment serves as a stern reminder that courts will not tolerate laxity and misuse of judicial time, particularly in high-value commercial disputes, and that sufficient cause for delay must be supported by cogent explanations rather than vague assertions.
Bottom Line:
Condonation of delay in representing plaint and paying deficit court fee - Mere reference to Covid-19 pandemic and difficulty in mobilising funds, without specific and satisfactory explanation for enormous delay of 1161 days and 1181 days, is not sufficient cause - Filing money suit for Rs.2.5 crores with only Rs.10/- court fee and paying deficit court fee after about three years held to be callous, abusive of process of law and warranting realistic costs.
Statutory provision(s):
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 35
