SH. CHAND KHAN Vs. SH. MOHAMMAD MUZEEB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. CM No. 2309/2018 (delay in re-filing)

(2.) For the reasons stated in the application, delay in re-filing is condoned. CM stands disposed of. CM No. 2306/2018 (delay of 457 days in filing the appeal) & CM No. 2307/2018 (stay) in RFA No. 59/2018

(3.) There is a large delay of 457 days in filing of the appeal by the appellant/defendant against the impugned judgment and decree decreeing the suit for recovery of Rs.13,50,000/- along with interest at 8% per annum simple. The delay is sought to be explained by the appellant/defendant by pleading that appellant/defendant was never told by his Advocate that evidence had to be led in the suit. In my opinion, the averments in the application for condonation of delay of 457 days are not believable because appellant/defendant is admittedly a builder. Surely a builder is not a layman in that sense of term of an illiterate person because a builder would otherwise have issues to deal with law or cases in courts, and consequently, the explanation of the appellant/defendant that the appellant/defendant was not informed by his Advocate of requirement to lead evidence cannot be believed. This is all the more so because evidence of the appellant/defendant has not been closed after giving one or two opportunities but has been closed after giving repeated opportunities. Though there is no reason to condone the delay and appeal is liable to be and is accordingly dismissed on account of barred by limitation however I have heard the case on merits hence this application is allowed for the appeal to be heard on merits.