PREMOO Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length.

(2.) BY the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 18.3.2006, passed by the District Judge, Uttarkashi.

(3.) ON coming to know about the order of dismissal of the appeal, the petitioner moved a restoration application alongwith the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, for condonation of delay on 16.7.2003 on the ground that he engaged one Sri Shardul Singh Negi, advocate and on the assurance of the advocate that he will do pairvi in the case, the petitioner could not appear in the case. The petitioner has submitted that Sri Shardul Singh Negi, advocate shifted to Dehradun and he neither appeared in the Court nor informed the petitioner. The petitioner came to know about the dismissal of the case when a notice for eviction was served upon him on 28.6.2002. The petitioner immediately filed the application for restoration of the appeal along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The District Judge has rejected the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act on the ground that the petitioner has been negligent.