RAJINDER KUMAR SUD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated May 3, 1999 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Shimla whereby an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act moved by the Respondents for condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the said Court, has been allowed.

(2.) The facts leading to the presentation of the present revision, in brief, are that the Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'Plaintiff) instituted a suit for declaration to the effect that the act of the Respondents (here-after referred to as 'Defendants') in disconnecting the telephone No. 78103 installed in the premises of the Plaintiff is null and void and the demand notices with respect to the local calls for the different periods amounting to Rs. 6,694/- are illegal, unwarranted and not binding to the Plaintiff, and for mandatory injunction directing the Defendants to restore the telephone to working order and to properly investigate the matter of the excess billing and to take remedial steps for proper billing of the telephone. The suit was contested by the Defendants on various grounds. Finally, the learned Sub-Judge, First Class, Shimla decreed the suit vide judgment dated October, 22, 1993.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved, the Appellants/Defendants presented a memo of appeal against the said judgment and decree of the learned Sub-Judge alongwith application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the said appeal. Since the appeal was assigned to the learned Additional District Judge, Shimla, therefore, the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay came to be heard by him and he allowed the application by the impugned order.