KAMLESH KISHORE Vs. VISHAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed order dated 16.10.2017, passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge, Court No. IV, Hamirpur in Panchayat Appeal No. 01 of 2016 dated 16.10.2017, vide which learned Court below has dismissed the appeal filed by present petitioner by holding that as the appeal was time barred and there was no application filed for condonation of delay, therefore, the Court in view of the statutory provisions contained in Section 3(1) of the Limitation Act 1963 had no option, but to dismiss the same.

(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the impugned order as also record of the case, in my considered view there is no illegality with the findings returned by learned Court below. It is not in dispute that the appeal which was filed before learned Court below was time barred. No application was filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, praying for condonation of delay either along with the appeal or at any stage during the pendency of the same. Therefore, in this factual situation, when there was no application, whatsoever, filed by the present petitioner praying for condonation of delay, learned Court below had no option but to strictly proceed in consonance with the mandate of Section 3(1) of the Limitation Act. This is exactly what has been done by learned Court below. Therefore, as impugned order does not suffers from jurisdictional error, this petition is dismissed, so also miscellaneous applications, if any.

(3.) At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to file a fresh appeal along with an application for condonation of delay. In the peculiar facts of this case said liberty cannot be granted. Otherwise also, party may seek recourse if any available in law and for that no liberty need be granted by the Court.