BALDEV RAJ @ MINTU Vs. DIMPLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present revision petition is directed against the order dated 01.02.2010 whereby the Lower Appellate Court has dismissed the application for condonation of delay of 13 months and accordingly, dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiff/petitioner, against the judgment and decree dated 22.08.2007 (Annexure P1), whereby his suit for recovery of Rs. 3 lacs as damages along with interest, was dismissed.

(2.) The dispute in the present case arises from an incident which occurred on 10.02.1997, in which the respondent-defendant was an accused in FIR No.16/67 of a charge under Section 326 IPC, on account of the fact that he had thrown acid on the face of the plaintiff. The suit for recovery, on account of compensation, along with interest, was filed on 19.02.1998. During the proceedings of the suit, the defendant was also prosecuted in the abovementioned FIR and earned acquittal on 24.07.2000. The Trial Court also, thereafter, dismissed the suit for recovery on 22.08.2007. At that stage, the petitioner chose not to file an appeal. However, a Division Bench of this Court Court in Criminal Appeal No.675-DBA of 2000, reversed the judgment and sentenced the accused-respondent for 2 years under Section 326 IPC and also made him liable to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- on 03.07.2008. It is not disputed that the sentence has been further upheld by the Apex Court and the amount of compensation has also been deposited.

(3.) That criminal appeal being decided in his favour, the plaintiff filed the appeal on 08.11.2008, which was, at that point of time, barred by 13 months. The appeal was accompanied with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 wherein the plea was taken that he had got a shock due to the dismissal of the criminal case and also the dismissal of the civil suit and therefore, on the appeal being allowed by the High Court, he had preferred the appeal which was time-barred and thus, there was sufficient cause in condoning the delay.