COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS vs STANDARD MOTOR PRODUCTS, ETC.

The Supreme Court held that a Single Judge is competent to dismiss applications for condonation of delay in statutory appeals, affirming that this does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court clarified that Order VI, Rule 2(14) of the Supreme Court Rules allows a Single Judge to handle applications for enlargement or abridgement of time, except for those fixed by the court or for Special Leave Petitions. The distinction made for applications under Article 136 is justified as they are treated as a separate class, thus upholding the constitutionality of the rules in question.