Rajasthan High Court
State Of Rajasthan vs Mathura Lal S/O Heera Lal ... on 27 January, 2023
Bench: Chandra Kumar Songara
[2023/RJJP/000674]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Restoration Application No. 4/2023
1. State Of Rajasthan through Tehsildar, Digod.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector, Kota.
----Applicants/appellants
Versus
Mathura Lal S/o Heera Lal, R/o Nimoda Hariji, Tehsil Digod,
District Kota.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shailesh Sharma, AGC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
27/01/2023
Matter has come up on misc. application bearing
Inward No.12/2023 filed by the learned counsel appearing for
the applicants-appellants under Section 5 of the Limitation Act,
1963 seeking condonation of delay in filing the aforesaid
restoration application.
It is pleaded in the aforesaid application that the appeal
was filed on behalf of the appellants against the impugned
judgment & decree darted 26.07.2012 passed by the Court of
Additional District & Sessions Judge No.2, Kota in Civil Regular
Appeal No.16/2012 and against the judgment & decree dated
23.07.2007 passed by the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) Digod, Kota
in Civil Suit No.35/2001. The said appeal came to be listed before
the Court on 17.11.2017 but on that day, counsel for the
appellants could not appear before the Court and the same was
dismissed for non-prosecution. The order dated 17.11.2017
[2023/RJJP/000674] (2 of 3) [CRES-4/2023]
passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court was neither within
the knowledge of the applicants-parties nor within the knowledge
of their counsel.
Heard. Perused the material made available on record.
In the present case, the application under Section 5 of
Limitation Act has been filed after an inordinate delay of 1845
days and the applicants have failed to make out any sufficient
cause for condoning the delay in filing the aforesaid restoration
application.
In the case of Majji Sannemma @ Sanyasirao Vs.
Reddy Sridevi & Others, 2022 (1) DNJ (SC) 346, Hon'ble
Apex Court, has observed as under:-
"8. Applying the law laid down by this Court in the
aforesaid decisions to the facts of the case on hand
and considering the averments in the application for
condonation of delay, we are of the opinion that as
such no explanation much less a sufficient or a
satisfactory explanation had been offered by
respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein - appellants before
the High Court for condonation of huge delay of 1011
days in preferring the Second Appeal. The High Court
is not at all justified in exercising its discretion to
condone such a huge delay. The High Court has not
exercised the discretion judiciously. The reasoning
given by the High Court while condoning huge delay
of 1011 days is not germane. Therefore, the High
Court has erred in condoning the huge delay of 1011
days in preferring the appeal by respondent Nos.1
and 2 herein - original defendants. Impugned order
passed by the High Court is unsustainable both, on
law as well as on facts."
After going through the contents of the application for
condonation of delay and in view of judgment rendered in the case
of Majji Sannemma @ Sanyasirao (supra), this Court is of the
view that the delay in filing the restoration application cannot be
[2023/RJJP/000674] (3 of 3) [CRES-4/2023]
said to be bonafide or unintentional. There is no justification in
condoning the inordinate delay 1845 days in filing the restoration
application.
Accordingly, application bearing Inward No.12/2023
filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act seeking condonation of
delay in filing the restoration application is dismissed.
Consequent, upon dismissal of application under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the restoration application is also
dismissed being time barred.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J
Ashish Kumar /40
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
