MUNSHI LAL Vs. GAON SABHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS review petition has been filed against the order dated 14-12-95 passed by this Court, where by- the applicant, Munshi Lal, has prayed for considering the additional evidence filed before the Additional Com­missioner.

(2.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties on the review petition and perused the relevant papers on file.

(3.) HAVING heard the learned Counsel for the parlies going through the records, I find that the review petition has been filed after expiry of limitation and in this respect the review petitioner has sought for con­donation of delay under Section 5 of Limitation Act, where in he pleads that due to late receipts of the copy of the order dated 14-12-95 and also due to ignorance of law, review petition could not be filed with inthe prescribed period of limitation; in this regard he also pleads that he is semi illiterate person as such liberal attitude be adopted and review petition be taken to be in time, after condoning the delay, . I find substance in the submission made by the learned Counsel for review petitioner as such, the delay in filing the same is here by condoned. As the same stands unopposed. So far as the consideration of additional evidence admitted by additional commis­sioner is concerned, the vary file of the learned Additional Commissioner shows that he has only ordered for keeping the same on file on payment of some costs, meantime there by that additional evidence has only been kept on file despite getting placed on file they have not been considered while dealing with the matter by the additional Commissioner, the reason for the same is unknown. As said above, the additional evidence is ordered to be kept on file by the lower appellate Court as such it should the lower appel­late Court that should consider by this way or that way. The citation referred to above is applicable to the some extent of the facts and circumstances of the instant case. I find force in the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for review petitioner;as such the same is liable to be allowed and the order dated 14-12-95 modified to the extent that the whole matter needs reappraisal at the level of lower appellate Court as it has ordered to keep on file the additional evidence. As such, the matter should be sent back to Com­missioner for rehearing as observed above in the matter. In the result, the review petition is here by allowed the order dated 14-12-95 is modified to the extent that the whole matter is remanded to Commissioner, Moradabad Division, to decide the matter in the light of observations made above. Review allowed