KRISHAN LAL Vs. HANUMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present application filed under Section 5 read with Article 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, the petitioner is seeking condonation of delay in filing the revision petition.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case are that the suit filed under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 20th March, 1991 passed by the Ms. Ravinder Kaur, Sub Judge, 1st Class, Delhi against the petitioner herein. The petitioner was advised to file the appeal against the said judgment and decree and the said appeal was filed within the period of limitation. When the appeal came up for hearing on 5th February, 1993 before the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi, an objection was raised about the maintainability of the appeal on the ground that the appeal arose from the judgment and decree in a suit filed under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act. The petitioner made a statement before the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Delhi for withdrawal of the appeal with liberty to file a revision petition in the .appropriate Court. The learned Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with permission to the petitioner to file a revision petition in the appropriate Court. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn on 5th February, 1993 and the revision petition along with the present application for condonation of delay was filed. There has been a delay of about two years in preferring the revision petition before this Court.

(3.) During the course of arguments, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the provisions of Section 14(1) and (2) of the Limitation Act are applicable to the facts of the case, the said Section reads as under:-