DAMARLA SAVITHRI Vs. KANDE SREENIVASULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed for condonation of delay of 1808 days in filing appeal against the Judgment and decree dated 19-11-2007 in O.S.No.442/2004 on the file of the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nellore.

(2.) The respondent filed the above mentioned suit for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 18-8-2004. The applicant/defendant contested the suit. By Judgment and decree dated 19-11-2007, the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nellore, decreed the suit. Feeling aggrieved by the said decree, the applicant filed A.S.(SR) No.4021/2013. She has also filed ASMP No.576/2013 for condonation of delay of 1808 days in filing the said appeal. Along with the said application, the applicant filed an affidavit sworn to on 26-2-2013 wherein she has inter alia stated that in the E.P. the lower Court has executed registered sale deed in favour of the respondent; that initially she has filed I.A.No.148/2008 seeking cancellation of the Judgment and decree in O.S.No.442/2004 and the same was dismissed; that as advised, she has filed C.R.P.No.5252/2012 against the order passed in the said I.A; that later on the applicant was advised by her counsel that the relief claimed in the revision petition will not suffice and that therefore she has filed the present appeal with the delay of 1808 days.

(3.) The respondent filed a counter-affidavit wherein he has inter alia stated that as the applicant has not come forward to execute registered sale deed in pursuance of the Judgment and decree, he was constrained to file the E.P; that instead of filing the appeal, the applicant has filed I.A.No.148/2008 under Section 151 CPC for cancellation or revocation of the decree on the ground that the same was obtained by playing fraud and misrepresentation; that in pursuance of the order allowing the E.P., registered sale deed was executed by the lower Court in his favour on 15-9-2011; that after execution of the registered sale deed, the respondent has sold the property in favour of various individuals by means of registered sale deeds and possession was delivered and that thereby third party rights have come in. The respondent has accordingly strongly opposed the request for condonation of delay.