KISHORI LAL Vs. SURENDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been filed for condonation of 130 days' delay in filing the revision. It has been asserted that the matter was decided on 12/12/2024 in the absence of the applicant/petitioner. The applicant was never informed about the date of the hearing. The Court had issued the summons, which was received by the applicant's father, but he failed to communicate the date of the hearing to the applicant. The applicant did not appear before the Court, and his complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution. The complainant could not visit the Court or contact his counsel during the winter vacation and could not learn about the dismissal of the complaint. The complainant had enquired from his counsel about the complaint in March 2025, and he was told that the complaint was dismissed in default on 12/12/2024. The applicant applied for a copy of the order and approached the learned counsel. There is a delay in filing the revision, which is due to circumstances beyond the applicant's control. Hence, the application.

(2.) The application is opposed by filing a reply asserting that the applicant was duly served and was aware of the proceedings. The applicant was duty-bound to act with due diligence and establish sufficient cause for the delay in filing the revision. He has failed to disclose any reason for the condonation of the delay. Therefore, it was prayed that the present application be dismissed.

(3.) I have heard Ms Anu Tuli, learned counsel for the applicant/ petitioner and Ms Preetika Thakur, learned counsel for the respondent/accused.