ANANDA NAIDU V Vs. VYASARAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Counsel for the respondents at length.

(2.) The petitioner has preferred an appeal against the judgment and decree in O.S.NO. 935 of 1986 before the District Court, Chittoor. Along with the appeal an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking to condone delay of 90 days was also filed. It is stated that the application filed for condonation of delay was not considered by the Court below and was dismissed. Aggrieved by the said dismissal order, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

(3.) Sri. A.T.M.Rangaramanujam, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the delay in preferring the appeal against the judgment and decree in O.S.No. 935 of 1986 dated 15-7-1993 though was not properly explained, but the fact remains that the petitioner was suffering from Blood Pressure and heart ailment and was advised bed rest by a Doctor for the period from 15-7-1993 to 15-10-1993. A certificate to that effect was also placed before the Court below, and the Court has not properly appreciated the gist of the application and has only technically dealt with the matter and dismissed the application.