RAGHAVAN NAIR Vs. K S E B

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Electricity O.P. filed by the revision petitioner before the lower court was dismissed on the ground of limitation. His petition to condone the delay was dismissed on the ground that the court exercising jurisdiction under S.16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act has no jurisdiction to consider an application under S.5 of the Limitation Act. THE court also held that there were no sufficient grounds for condoning the delay.

(2.) THIS Court in K.S.E.B. v. Cheriyan Varghese (1989(1) K.L.T. 451) held that the order of the District Court under S.16(3) of the Telegraph Act is revisable under S.115 C.P.C. for the reason that the order is that of a "Court".

(3.) THE lower court held that the ground raised for condoning the delay cannot be accepted in view of the fact that the petitioner's former Advocate did not file any affidavit before that court. THE petitioner has filed an affidavit to the effect that his former Advocate shifted his practice from Pathanamthitta to Ranni, and therefore he was unable to file the petition before the Pathanamthitta court in time. THEre is no affidavit controverting this averment.