The Andhra Pradesh High Court has set aside a trial court order condoning a delay of 1,400 days in challenging an ex parte eviction decree, holding that general explanations without supporting evidence cannot constitute sufficient cause under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Justice K. Sreenivasa Reddy passed the common order while allowing two Civil Revision Petitions filed by Yelisetti Venkata Lakshmi against Pottelu Gowri.
Background
The dispute arose from an eviction petition filed under Section 10(2)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, alleging wilful default in payment of rent.
Although the tenant entered appearance through counsel on November 27, 2017, she failed to file a counter despite repeated opportunities. The trial court consequently passed an ex parte eviction order on November 13, 2018.
During execution proceedings, the tenant approached the court seeking condonation of a 1,400-day delay and setting aside of the eviction order. The trial court allowed both applications on August 5, 2025.
The High Court observed that the tenant's appearance through counsel demonstrated her knowledge of the eviction proceedings. Her claims regarding lack of family assistance, the COVID-19 pandemic and allegedly misplaced earlier applications were not supported by sufficient material.
The Court observed:
"The extraordinary circumstances prevailing during the pandemic are relevant considerations, the same cannot automatically explain the entire period of delay in every case. The respondent has to establish the manner in which those circumstances prevented her from taking appropriate steps in the case proceedings."
The Court further emphasised that condonation of delay requires judicial scrutiny and cannot rest merely on equitable considerations.
Holding that the trial court had failed to properly examine the explanation for the prolonged delay, the High Court observed:
"The respondent failed to establish either sufficient cause or due diligence in condoning the delay of 1,400 days by producing satisfactory material on record as per the settled principles governing Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963."
Accordingly, both revision petitions were allowed. The delay condonation application was dismissed, the application to set aside the ex parte eviction order was rejected as time-barred, and the landlord was permitted to proceed with execution proceedings.
Case Details
Case Title: Yelisetti Venkata Lakshmi v. Pottelu Gowri
Case Number: Civil Revision Petition Nos. 978 of 2026 and 1064 of 2026
Judge: Justice K. Sreenivasa Reddy
Decision Date: 15 October 2026
Counsel for the Petitioner: Adv. Arrabolu Sai Naveen (Petitioner)
Counsel for the Respondent: Adv. P. Rajasekhar
