P.K. Ramachandran v. State of Kerala

7 SCC 556Reported decision1997#1941 most cited

What is P.K. Ramachandran v. State of Kerala authority for?

The law of limitation must be applied with all its rigour, and courts cannot extend the period of limitation on mere equitable considerations or for casual explanations without sufficient cause. Parties must demonstrate diligence and a bona fide reason for the delay.

59

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

P.K. Ramachandran v. State of Kerala · 7 SCC 556 · condonation of delay · sufficient cause · law of limitation · strict application · equitable grounds · Section 249(3) · Income-tax Act 1961

Sections most often in play

Section 253(5)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 147Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250 of the Income-tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 256section 202section 66short deduction of tdssection 253(5)section 253(3)bona fide mistakesection 249(3)section 249(2)section 200a(1)delay in filing appealsection 249

Judgments citing P.K. Ramachandran v. State of Kerala

Shri Pragnesh Lallubhai Patel, Na vs. Arivs.ITO, Ward-4, Navsari

In the result, appeal of the assessee is unadmitted

ITA 940/SRT/2024[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Surat08 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Shri Pragnesh Lallubhai Patel, Ito Ward-4, At Butlav, Post Dabhalai, Room No. 203, Swapnalok Soc. Navsari,-396466. Vs. Nr. Kaliawadi Bridge, Navsari, Gujarat-396445. Pan No. Aodpp 0260 N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rasesh Shah, CA
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 5Section 69

…de by the assessee to verify the filing or progress of the appeal for several years thereafter. The explanation, therefore, is vague, general, and lacking in demonstrable bona fides. 10.The Hon’ble Supreme Court in P.K. Ramachandran v. State of Kerala (1997) 7 SCC 556 has held that while the courts are empowered to condone delay to advance justice, such discretion cannot be exercised in favour of a litigant who has not acted with due diligence. The law of limitation, though sometimes harsh, must be applied with its full force where no convincing justification is shown for the delay. 11.Applying these settled pr…

Madhuri Sunil Zode, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 20(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is not admitted

ITA 419/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2020-21 Madhuri Sunil Zode, Ito, Ward 20(2)(1), Flat No. 8, 8Th Floor, Singers Wood, Piramal Chamber, 27Th Road, Bandra West, Vs. Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400050. Pan No. Aaapz 1530 G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat KumarFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ITR 193 (Bom), the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court held that the test of sufficient cause is to be judged with reference to reasonableness and the conduct expected of a litigant acting with ordinary prudence. Likewise, in P.K. Ramachandran v. State of Kerala (1997) 7 SCC 556, Hon‟ble Supreme Court cautioned that the law of limitation has to be applied with all its rigour, and that courts cannot extend limitation on mere equitable considerations. The relevant observation of Hon‟ble Supreme Court (supra) is reproduced as under: “ That apart, we find that in the application filed by the respondent seeking condonation of…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Saiyedpura Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer TDS CPC, CPC

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 855/SRT/2024[2016-201]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2016-201

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…e case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (supra), which was pronounced on 19.02.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has b…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officxer, TDS, CPC

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 818/SRT/2024[A.Y. 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…e case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (supra), which was pronounced on 19.02.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has b…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 816/SRT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…e case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (supra), which was pronounced on 19.02.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has b…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Altret House, Saiyedpura vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC, Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 815/SRT/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…e case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (supra), which was pronounced on 19.02.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has b…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 814/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…e case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (supra), which was pronounced on 19.02.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has b…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC, Surat

ITA 812/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing) Si. No.

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…e case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (supra), which was pronounced on 19.02.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated 08.04.2024, it has been held that condonation of…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 811/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing) Si. No.

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…e case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (supra), which was pronounced on 19.02.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated 08.04.2024, it has been held that condonation of…

Altret Industries Private Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, TDS, CPC, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 810/SRT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 200A(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…e case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (supra), which was pronounced on 19.02.1987. There was delay only 4 days in the said case. However, we find that in the subsequent decisions, namely, (i) P. K. Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, (ii) Pundik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineers, Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448 and (iii) Basawaraj and Anr vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (2013) 14 SCC 81, (iv) Pathapati Subba Reddy (dies) By L. Rs. & Ors. Vs The Special Deputy Collector (LA), SLP(C) No.31248 of 2018 (SC), dated Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd. 08.04.2024, it has b…

Biswajit Roy, Jalpaiguri vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Jalpaiguri

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 866/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Him, In Limine, By Not Condoning A Delay Of 436 Days Before Him.

Section 115BSection 250Section 271ASection 69A

…a strict approach so as to protect the substantial rights of the parties. In the absence of sufficient cause, delay cannot be condoned merely on equitable ground as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P.K. Ramachandran vs. State of Kerala. (1997) 7 SCC 556: (1998) AIR 1998 SC 2276. 2.10 In the present case, the appeal has been filed after delay of 436 days. Even though a liberal approach has to be adopted, but that does not mean that any plea without any plausible or acceptable basis and not even bearing semblance or rationality has to be accepted, and delay has to be condoned. That shall be against…

Sushila Rajesh Yadav, Silvassa vs. CIT Appeal, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

ITA 1282/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1282/Srt/2024 Sushila Rajesh Yadav

Section 147Section 250Section 253(3)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1282/SRT/2024 Sushila Rajesh Yadav, Assessment Year: (2012-13) 16, Kokul Complex, Near Radha Weigh Bridge, Dadra & Nagar Haveli - 396230 (Hybrid Hearing) Vs. The ITO, Ward - 8, Vapi स्थायी लेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: ADWPY7423L (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Appellant by Shri Hardik Vora, AR Respondent by Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement 29/05/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: T…

Future Money Sales and Marketing Pvt.Ltd, A-28, Near Bankey Bihari Tampel Rajendra Nager, Bareilly-243001, Bareilly vs. Income Tax Officer -1(2), Bareilly-New.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for statistical purposes

ITA 194/LKW/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriafuture Money Sales & Income Tax Officer-1(2) V. Marketing Pvt. Ltd Rampur Garden, Bareilly- A-28, Near Bankey Bihari New-243001. Tample, Rajendra Nagar, Bareilly-243001. Pan:Aabcf4395H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Devashish Mehrotra, Adv Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 16 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 10 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Devashish Mehrotra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 144Section 249(2)Section 249(2)(b)Section 249(3)

…al after the expiration of the period of limitation prescribed u/s. 249(2) of the Act to be exercised where sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the time limitation is made out by the appellant. 2) P.K. Ramachanaran Vs. State of Kerala (1997) 7 SCC 556 to 558: In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes and the courts have no power to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds. 3) Vedabhai alias Vijayenatabhai Baburao Patil Vs. Shantaram Baburao P…

Vinit Vijay Kumar, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-13, Mumbai (Now DCIT, Circle 17(1), Mumbai)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 552/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vinit Vijay Kumar, Acit, Central Circle-13, (Now 35 Shreyas, 180 Madam Cama Dcit, Circle 17(1), Mumbai), Vs. Road, Nariman Point, G Block Bkc, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020. Complex, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aacpv 9310 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ashish Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Dharmesh Shah
Section 143(3)Section 249(2)Section 250

…extending more than six years and eight months. It is held in the case extending more than six years and eight months. It is held in the case extending more than six years and eight months. It is held in the case of P.K. Ramchandran vs. State of Kerala (1997) 7 SCC 556 that law of Ramchandran vs. State of Kerala (1997) 7 SCC 556 that law of Ramchandran vs. State of Kerala (1997) 7 SCC 556 that law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be ap…

M/S. Paravur Service Co-Operative Bank, Kollam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Kollam

In the result, the appeal and stay petition filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 767/COCH/2023[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Santosh P. Abraham, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, D.R
Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…nt cause' receiving a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no negligence nor inaction nor want of bona fide is imputable to the appellant.” (ii) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of P.K. Ramachandran Vs. State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, wherein held as under: “In the absence of reasonable, satisfactory or even appropriate explanation for seeking condonation of delay, the same is not to be condoned lightly. It is further observed that the law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes and the cou…

M/S. Sjs Enterprises Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 972/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year:2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Rony Anthony, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234B

…receiving a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no negligence nor inaction nor want of bona fide is imputable to the appellant.” 4.9.2 Further, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of P.K. Ramachandran Vs. State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, wherein held as under: “In the absence of reasonable, satisfactory or even appropriate explanation for seeking condonation of delay, the same is not to be condoned lightly. It is further observed that the law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes and the cour…

M/S. Chitradurga Nirmithi Kendra, Chitradurga vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Davangere

ITA 1018/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 12ASection 40

…nt cause' receiving a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no negligence nor inaction nor want of bona fide is imputable to the appellant." (ii) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P.K. Ramachandran Vs. State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, wherein held as under: "In the absence of reasonable, satisfactory or even appropriate explanation for seeking condonation of delay, the same is not to be condoned lightly. It is further observed that the law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes and the cour…

The Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association®, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 704/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

…receiving a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no negligence nor inaction nor want of bona fide is imputable to the appellant.” (ii) Further, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of P.K. Ramachandran Vs. State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, wherein held as under: “In the absence of reasonable, satisfactory or even appropriate explanation for seeking condonation of delay, the same is not to be condoned lightly. It is further observed that the law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes and the cou…

The Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association®, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 703/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

…receiving a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no negligence nor inaction nor want of bona fide is imputable to the appellant.” (ii) Further, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of P.K. Ramachandran Vs. State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, wherein held as under: “In the absence of reasonable, satisfactory or even appropriate explanation for seeking condonation of delay, the same is not to be condoned lightly. It is further observed that the law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes and the cou…

The Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association®, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 702/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

…receiving a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no negligence nor inaction nor want of bona fide is imputable to the appellant.” (ii) Further, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of P.K. Ramachandran Vs. State of Kerala & Anr. (1997) 7 SCC 556, wherein held as under: “In the absence of reasonable, satisfactory or even appropriate explanation for seeking condonation of delay, the same is not to be condoned lightly. It is further observed that the law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes and the cou…