MARLO OR FAB GOLD Vs. ARVIND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present application filed under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, the Appellant seeks condonation of delay of 121 days in filing the present appeal.

(2.) The only explanation given in the application for the delay is that the counsel engaged by the Appellant did not update it about the proceedings and the Appellant came to know about passing of the impugned order only when it received a call from the Court of the concerned SDM for recovery of the amount mentioned therein in the month of July, 2018.

(3.) In my view, not only the explanation given on behalf of the Appellant is insufficient but also no document has been placed on record to show as to what action has been taken by the Appellant against its former counsel. Be that as it may, I proceed to consider the appeal on merits in the interest of justice.