JAVRILAL Vs. HAJARISINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) <DJG>S.K.Mal Lodha, J.</DJG> This revision application by the decree-holder is directed against the order of the learned District Judge, Pali, dated August 24, 1978, by which, he dismissed decree-holder's appeal on the ground that it was lodged beyond the prescribed period of limitation.

(2.) The relevant facts necessary for the disposal of this revision are these. The petitioner, vide Suit No. 19 of 1979, obtained a decree on Sept. 18, 1974, Execution was levied. The judgment-debtor-non-petitioner preferred objection under Section 47, C. P. C. The objection of the judgment-debtor was accepted by the learned Civil Judge on April 7, 1976 and the decree-holder was directed to take possession of the shop marked as OPQR and not EFGH in the plan, which was submitted by the judgment-debtor. Being aggrieved by the aforementioned order, dated April 7, 1976, the decree-holder prefer red appeal before the District Judge, Pali on May 18, 1976. On Sept. 8, 1976, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act (for short 'the Act') sup ported by the affidavits of Shri Kewalchand and Shri Jaswantraj, Advocate, was filed. The appeal was registered subject to objection of limitation on Nov. 2, 1976. Summonses were ordered to be issued to the judgment-debtor- non-petitioner and the appeal was fixed for arguments, on the point of limitation, on Dec. 10, 1976. The learn ed District Judge, by his order dated Aug. 24, 1978, dismissed the appeal as barred by time. While dealing with the application under Section 5 of the Act, the learned District Judge recorded a finding that the advice/opinion given by the learned counsel for the decree- holder was not bona fide.

(3.) Feeling dissatisfied with the order of the learned District Judge, dismissing the appeal being time barred, the decree-holder has come to this Court in revision as aforesaid.