HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 241/2020
1. State Of Raj., Through District Collector Bharatpur
2. Chief Executive Officer Of Case, Executive Engineer (Engi-
neering) Zila Parishad (Rural Development Cell) Bharat-
pur District Bharatpur Rajasthan
----Appellants
Versus
1. Roopkishore S/o Late Shri Rambharosi, Aged About 45
Years, R/o Village Noha, Tehsil And District Bharatpur
2. Gram Panchyat Rundh, Ikran Through Sarpanch Gram
Panchyat Rundh Ikran,panchayat Samiti Sewar, Tehsil
And District Bharatpur
3. Bharat Singh S/o Ramesh Singh, R/o Village Bajhera,
Post Bchamdi, Tehsil And District Bharatpur
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Dr. Ganesh Parihar (through video conference) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mohit Khandelwal (through video conference) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 30/06/2021 By way of this Civil Second Appeal, appellants have challenged the judgment and decree dated 27.01.2020 passed by Additional District Judge No.1, Bharatpur in regular Civil Appeal No. 85/2019, whereby learned Appellate Court dismissed the ap- plication filed by the appellants under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning delay in preferring First Appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree dated 18.01.2019 passed by Senior Civil Judge-Cum-Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.4, Bharatpur in (Downloaded on 30/06/2021 at 09:00:05 PM) (2 of 3) Civil Suit No.25/2016, whereby suit for declaration and permanent injunction was decreed.
Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that learned First Appellate Court, in cursory manner without applying the application of mind, dismissed the application filed by the appellants under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Learned counsel for the appellants also submitted that Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of S. Ganesharaju held that the expression "sufficient cause" as appearing in Section of the Limitation Act has to be given a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice.
Learned counsel for the appellants also submitted that there was no mala fide intention for delay in filing the appeal. So, appeal filed by the appellants be allowed and the matter be remanded to the learned Appellate Court for deciding the matter afresh after hearing both the parties on merit.
Learned counsel for the respondents also does not seriously oppose the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellants and submits that time period for six months be given to the learned Appellate Court for deciding the appeal on merit.
I have given the thoughtful consideration on the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned counsel for the respondents.
Learned Appellate Court has wrongly rejected the application filed by learned counsel for the appellants for condoning the delay. Learned Appellate Court has to decide the appeal on merit not to dismiss on technical grounds. So, judgment and decree of the (Downloaded on 30/06/2021 at 09:00:05 PM) (3 of 3) learned Appellate Court being devoid of merit, is liable to be set aside.
Appeal filed by the appellant is allowed. Judgment and decree of the learned Appellate Court dated 27.01.2020 is set aside. Learned Appellate Court is directed to decide the appeal on merit after hearing both the parties preferably within six months.
Parties are directed to appear before the learned Appellate Court on 20.07.2021.
Stay application also stands disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Seema/47 (Downloaded on 30/06/2021 at 09:00:05 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)