LAWS(CAL)-2015-9-4

K. HYDROOS Vs. P.K. HASSAN ALI

Decided On September 03, 2015
K. Hydroos Appellant
V/S
P.K. Hassan Ali Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the instant revisional application the petitioner assailed the order (being order No. 05 dated 11.06.2015) wherein the learned court below rejected the prayer for condonation of delay in filing the appeal against the judgement and decree passed by learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Port Blair in TS No. 06 of 2005. The instant revisional application has a long chequered history which is noted below: - -

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner at the outset pointed out that the petitioner could not appear before the court of learned District Judge in due time due to the fact that the petitioner was awfully busy for the treatment of his wife who was suffering from cancer and finally expired on 4th June 2014 for which his client could not file the appeal being TA No. 26 of 2014 in time, which was filed on 25.11.2015 with an application for condonation of delay in filing such appeal in terms of section 5 of the Limitation Act, rejection of which led the petitioner to take recourse to this Court by filing this revisional application assailing the impugned order.

(3.) MR . K.M.B. Jayapal, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that learned District Judge, Port Blair while dealing with the application for condonation of delay in filing appeal entered into merit of the case which is not permissible in law. In support of his contention he relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Apex court in State of Gujrat v. Sayed Mohd. Bakir El Edross reported in : AIR 1981 Supreme Court 1921 urged that while dealing with prayer of condonation of delay, the court should not be influenced by merit of the appeal. Relying on full bench decision of the Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad through the Municipal Commissioner v. Voltas Limited and etc. reported in : AIR 1995 Gujrat 29 and urged that 'the courts are required to take the liberal view while considering the facts constituting the sufficiency of the cause on the basis of which condonation of delay is sought.'