STATE OF HARYANA Vs. KAMLA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge dated 9.3.1993 whereby the appeal was dismissed being barred by limitation.

(2.) PLAINTIFF filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the courtyard as shown in the site plan attached with the plaint. The claim of the plaintiff was resisted by the defendants on a number of grounds. On the pleadings of the parties a number of issues were framed and the trial Court on the basis of evidence led found merit in the plea of the plaintiff and so granted the decree as prayed for. Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial Court, the defendants, filed an appeal after the expiry period of limitation. To cover up this lapse, an application for condonation of delay was filed alongwith the appeal. The Additional District Judge chose to examine this application on merit after the appearance of the respondent. Since no evidence was led, the Court found no valid ground to condone the same and so dismissed the appeal being barred by time.

(3.) THIS has been resisted by the counsel for the respondent. According to the counsel, an opportunity had been granted to the appellant to lead evidence in support of the application for condonation of delay. Since no evidence was led, the Court had no option but to decline the application. Thus, there is no illegality in the order passed by the Additional District Judge.