State Of Raj vs Motiram S/O Ramesh Chand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2547 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 242/2020

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.     Motiram S/o Ramesh Chand, R/o Village And Post Amoli,
       Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur
2.     Gram Panchyat Amoli, Through Sarpanch Village And
       Panchayat Amoli, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur
3.     Madho Singh Solanki S/o Hari Singh, R/o Shahpura, Post
       Mudiasad, Tehsil Weir 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. 84/2019, 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

(2 of 3)

Civil Suit No.23/2016, 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

(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/45

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)