RANJIT PRASAD SINGH Vs. ASHOK KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel, Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sinha, appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned counsel, Mr. Deepak Kumar Sinha, appearing on behalf of the opposite party.

(2.) This civil revision application has been filed by the defendant petitioner against the order dated 19.12.2009 passed by the learned Munsif, Naugachia in Misc. case No.06 of 2009, i.e., a proceeding under Order 9 Rule 4 C.P.C. whereby the learned Court below allowed the application and restored the title suit No.33 of 1989 to its original file.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that there was delay of about 4 years and no sufficient cause was shown to the Court but the Courts below without being satisfied with the delay, condoned the delay and allowed the limitation application and at the same time has restored the title suit to its original file. The learned counsel relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court 2011 (4) S.C.C. 363 Lanka Venkateswarlu v. State of Andhra Pradesh and submitted that "the discretion should be exercised systematically informed by reason. Liberal approach in considering sufficiency of cause for delay should not override substantial law of limitation, especially when Court finds no justification for delay". According to the learned counsel, the learned Court below merely on the basis of the application filed by the respondent condoned the delay of about 4 years. Therefore, the impugned Order is liable to be set aside.