V.S. CHOCKALINGAM PILLAI Vs. KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE civil revision petitioner/petitioner/appellant has filed this civil revision petition as against the order dated 1.8.2008 in I.A.No. 60 of 2008 in unnumbered A.S. passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli in dismissing the application filed by the revision petitioner praying to condone the delay of 58 days, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

(2.) THE learned Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli while passing orders in I.A.No. 60 of 2008 in unnumbered A.S. on 1.8.2008 has inter alia observed that the revision petitioner has not explained the delay of 58 days convincingly and finding no merit and substance in the application has resultantly dis -missed the same without costs.

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, the learned Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli has committed an error in dismissing the I.A.No. 60 of 2008 seeking to condone the delay of 58 days in filing the appeal and further that the learned District Judge should have taken judicial notice of the fact that the revision petitioner is a sickly person on account of his old age of 65 years and that the revision petitioner has filed a subsequent suit O.S.No. 40 of 2008 on a different cause of action against the respondents herein in regard to putting up of any construction in the suit schedule property and further since the suit property is a trust property, the interest of the public trust ought to have been taken note of by the learned Principal District Judge while condoning the delay of 58 days in preferring the appeal and therefore, prays for allowing the civil revision petition in the interest of justice.