SUBHASH CHAND Vs. ISHWAR DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The extant petition stands directed against the impugned order recorded, on 02.12.2016, by the learned Addl. District Judge-I, Kangara at Dharamshala in CMA No.27-D/2016.

(2.) The plaintiff's suit for declaration, injunction and possession vis-a-vis the suit property, was, decreed by the learned trial Court. However, the decree rendered by the learned trial Court was made subject to the plaintiff affixing court fee ad valorem vis-a-vis the value of the suit property, in respect whereof, a decree for possession was rendered. Any default, on the part of the plaintiff, to comply with the aforesaid condition, was, in the operative part of the judgment and decree, rendered by the learned trial Court, hence pronounced to entail dismissal, of, the plaintiff's suit.

(3.) The aggrieved defendants' reared an appeal therefrom, before the learned First Appellate Court. However, the defendants' appeal being time barred, it was accompanied by an application, constituted under the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Notice of the application, constituted under the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, was, ordered to be issued upon the plaintiff/cross-objector AND it was served upon the latter on 11.10.2007. However, the application constituted, under provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, bearing CMA No. 117 of 2007, stood on 5.7.2008, hence dismissed in default. After service of notice, of application aforesaid being effected, on 11.10.2007, upon, the plaintiff/cross-objector, the plaintiff instituted cross-objections, to, the yet unregistered appeal preferred by the aggrieved defendants, against, the judgment and decree, recorded by the learned trial Court upon his suit. The plaintiff's cross-objections, came to be instituted, within, one month of his being served, with a notice vis-a-vis the defendants' application, cast under the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, application whereof was appended with the yet unregistered Civil Appeal, (i) wherein, they sought condonation, of, delay in theirs belatedly preferring, an appeal before the learned First Appellate Court, against, the judgment and decree rendered by the learned trial Court. As aforestated, the defendants' apposite application, cast under the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, was, dismissed in default on 5.7.2008, (ii) consequently, the time barred appeal instituted by the aggrieved defendants before the learned First Appellate Court, thereupon ipso facto also entailed the ill consequence of its suffering its dismissal. Conspicuously, also unless an affirmative order, was pronounced, upon, the aggrieved defendants' application, instituted before the learned First Appellate Court, application whereof, was, cast under the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, obviously, hence, rendered the defendants' appeal to remain unregistered besides rendered it to be mis-constituted.