STATE OF HARYANA Vs. SH. MANGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jagadhri, dated 31st March, 2000, while exercising its appellate jurisdiction being the first court of facts and law.

(2.) THE appeal is barred by 215 days and the appeal is accompanied by the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The judgment was pronounced on 30.3.2000 and State claims to have received papers on 6.4.2000, while the appeal in this Court has been filed on 7.2.2001. The delay has hardly been explained in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. All that is stated is that the papers were received late in the office of the Advocate General, Haryana. This is not sufficient cause for condonation of delay. The delay of 215 days is required to be explained properly and a reasonable explanation ought to have come on record, which the appellants has miserably failed to state in the application. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of P.K. Ramachandran v. State of Kerala and another, JT 1997(8) SC 189 : 1997(4) RCR(Civil) 242 (SC), held that the limitation must be applied with all its rigorous. Reference can also be made to the judgment of this case in the case of Gram Panchayat, Malout v. Prem Singh, 1998(2) PLR 325 : 1998(2) RCR(Civil) 593 (P&H).

(3.) IT may be appropriate to mention here that both the Courts below have taken a concurrent view in decreeing the suit of the plaintiff in relation to the right with regard to trees standing on the land subject matter of the suit. The learned first appellate Court while affirming the fact of findings recorded by the learned trial Court held as under :-