1955 (for short ‘the Act of 1955’) was submitted by the respondents against father of the petitioner before the Court of Assistant Collector, Amer. Counsel submits that father of the petitioner died on 27.01.2014 and thereafter, an application for substitution of his legal representatives was submitted, but the petitioner was never served with the notice in the matter, pending before the Court of Assistant Collector and the notices were served upon mother of the petitioner, who is an illiterate villager. Thereafter, an ex-parte decree was passed by the Assistant Collector vide judgment dated 27.09.2019. The petitioner was not having any knowledge about passing of the aforesaid order and he came to know about the same, only when he received a notice from the Tehsildar, Amer on 14.02.2020 and thereafter, an application was submitted for obtaining certified copy of the aforesaid judgment which was supplied on 26.02.2020. Subsequent thereto, an appeal was preferred by the petitioner before the RAA. Counsel submits that along-with the appeal, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was also submitted, narrating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal, but instead of deciding the matter on its merits, the appeal arising from the order of Assistant Collector has been rejected on the technical count of delay. The petitioner then approached the Board of Revenue by way of filing second appeal, however, the same was also rejected. Counsel submits that the matter was required to be heard and decided by the RAA on its merits and the same should not have been rejected on the technical count of delay.
