(1.) Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.
(2.) In the present writ petition, there is a challenge to the order dated 15/4/1993, passed by the Additional District Judge, Nagpur, in Misc. Civil Application No. 278/ 1990, filed in a Miscellaneous Appeal under Order 43, Rule 1(d) of C.P.C., whereby the Appellate Court dismissed the application for condonation of delay of 6 l/2 months in filing the appeal before the Appellate Court.
(3.) In support of the writ petition, Mr. Girish Choube, learned Counsel for the peti tioner argued that there was a delay of 6 1/2 months and that was explained in paragraph Nos. 2, 3 and 4 of the application for condonation of delay. The Appellate Court has in Paragraph Nos. 5 found that those reasons were not sufficient in order to satisfy the re quirement of section 5 of Limitation Act.