Court allowed a civil revision petition condoning a delay of 265 days in filing an appeal in a partition suit, noting the liberal construction required under the Limitation Act to advance justice.
Impugned order set aside; IA No. 486 of 2016 allowed; delay of 265 days condoned.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
CRP No. 963 of 2018
ORDER :
This civil revision petition is filed against the order dated 06-02-2018 passed in IA No.486 of 2016 in AS (SR) No.1586 of 2016 whereby and whereunder the Court below dismissed the said IA filed under Order 41, Rule 3 (A) CPC and Section 5 of the limitation Act to condone
delay of 265 days in filing the appeal by the petitioners
who are defendants in suit OS No.246 of 2010.
other than the mother and sister of the respondent. Respondent filed suit for partition and separate possession
after ejecting the revision petitioners therefrom and for other reliefs. The revision petitioners seek to assail the
judgment and decree in the said suit by way of appeal.
Parties are closely related. 1st petitioner is mother of the
respondent and she is aged about 72 years and is stated
2
to be suffering with ailments. The suit filed for partition
by the respondent is decreed against the petitioners. If the petitioners are denied the opportunity to file appeal, they will lose the right of appeal. It is settled proposition of law by catena of decisions of this Court as well as the Supreme Court that petitions filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is to be construed liberally and to advance the cause of justice. Sufficient reasons are mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the condonation petition.
expeditiously, in accordance with law. In the result, the civil revision petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petition if
any pending in the case shall stand disposed of. No order
as to costs.
___________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J_
Dated: 12-06-2018 NRG
3
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
CRP No. 963 of 2018 ///WEB//
Dated: 12-06-2018
NRG
4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether delay in filing a civil appeal should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Whether the impugned order dismissing the application for condonation of delay is sustainable.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mother and sister of respondent (Revision Petitioners)
Respondent (Defendant in Suit Family Suit)
A. Rajasheker Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
