SHJANTI DEVI Vs. GOMTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) List is being revised. Case is called out. None appears for the respondents whereas Mr. S.K. Mehrotra, learned Counsel for the petitioner is very much present to argue the case. Heard Mr. S.K. Mehrotra, learned Counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) Through the instant writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 25.8.2007 passed by the Additional District Judge, Unnao in Misc. Case No. 193 of 2006. The facts of the case in short reveals that in a Small Causes Case No. 7 of 2003 one application for amendment being Application No. 115-C was filed alongwith the application for condonation of delay. The Court below allowed the same with the fine of Rs. 100/. Aggrieved respondent challenged the same by filing revision before the District Judge. He also filed an application for condonation of delay in filing revision, which was registered as case No. 193 of 2006.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent had taken a plea to condone the delay in filing the revision that he acted upon on the advice of the Counsel which is liable to be excused, whereas it is not in the ordinary course of law to provide any such excuse as has been held by this Court in the case of Devi Prasad v. State of U.P. and others,1983 1 LCD 385. In this case this Court has expressed the following opinion: