TAYAL PAPER AND TRADERS Vs. SUBHASH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed by the appellants under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking waiver of delay in refiling the appeal.

(2.) Appellant No.2 has sought condonation of delay on the ground that appellant No.2 is an illiterate old lady and was suffering from number of diseases. She was busy in her own medical treatment as well as medical treatment of her sons, that one of her sons expired in the meantime and therefore, she could not contact and properly brief her lawyer.

(3.) Respondent has contested this application primarily alleging that appeal itself is not maintainable, that memo of appeal is not even signed by her or her counsel and that memo of parties has been signed by Shri Subhash Kumar Advocate who is not counsel for appellant No.2, that even if it is not signed by appellant No.2, other appellants were required to sign the appeal, especially when she had taken a defence that she had nothing to do with the business of appellant No.1, that the medical certificate placed on record are of May, 2006 and January, 2007 whereas the appeal was to be filed in April, 2007, that she has not given the details of illness of her sons, that the application is devoid of any merits and deserves dismissal.