DATTU BALA Vs. MARUTI BAPU PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was defendant no.1 in the suit for partition being Regular Civil Suit No. 799 of 1992. The suit was decreed by the Learned Civil Judge Junior Division, Islampur on 26th April, 2013. The para-10 of the trial Court judgment shows suit proceedings were adjourned at the request of defendant no.1 to afford him opportunity to adduce evidence. However, he did not lead evidence at all. His Advocate had filed a purshis and informed the learned Judge that, he had no instructions from defendant no.1. The trial Court, therefore afforded one more opportunity to the appellant to lead evidence on 5th April, 2013 but once again he failed to adduce the evidence. Thus, the decree passed by the trial Court was not an ex-parte decree.

(2.) Aggrieved by the decree of the trial Court dated 26th April, 2013, the appellant-defendant no.3 had preferred Regular Civil Appeal before the learned District Judge, Islampur alongwith Misc. Application No. 53 of 2013 for condonation of 291 days delay occurred in filing the Appeal. The applicant sought condonation of delay on two grounds, namely, (i) that he had sustained injury to his leg because of which he was not able to move out of the house, and (ii) that due to the strike of lawyers, then started on 29th July, 2013 and continued till September, 2013 he could not file the Appeal and this period needs to be excluded while, computing the period of limitation.

(3.) The Learned District Judge rejected the application vide order dated 19th July, 2014, against which, this Second Appeal is preferred.