PRIYANKA SHARMA & ORS vs UNION OF INDIA

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on : 22.01.2026 Pronounced on : 29.01.2026 Uploaded on : 29.01.2026 + FAO 59/2020 PRIYANKA SHARMA & ORS .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rajan Sood, Ms. Ashima Sood and Ms. Megha Sood, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent Through: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi CGSC with Ms. Swati Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Himanshi Singh and Ms. Monalisha Pradhan, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT CM APPL. 4630/2020 (delay of 690 days in filing the present appeal) 1. The present application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, read with Section 151 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 690 days in filing the accompanying appeal. 2. Mr. Rajan Sood, learned counsel for the appellant, has submitted that after passing of the impugned judgment, the appellant could not file the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI Signing Date:29.01.2026 18:59:45 FAO 59/2020 Page 1 of 10 accompanying appeal in time on account of paucity of funds and the resultant inability to obtain timely legal advice. 3. At this stage, it is pertinent to mention the decision rendered by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Mohsina v. Union of India1; wherein a delay of 804 days in filing of the appeal was condoned taking into account poor economic status of the appellants/claimants. Relevant excerpt from the decision is reproduced hereunder:- “4. The appellants are seeking condonation of delay of 804 days in filing the appeal on the ground that appellant no. 1 is an illiterate and poor lady; she lost her husband in the train accident; her father-in-law was pursuing the case before the Claims Tribunal; her father-in-law expired, whereupon her mot