LAXMI Vs. NARAYAN MANJAPPA KODIYA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in O.S. No. 28/1999 on the file of Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), has come up in this second appeal impugning concurrent finding of both the Courts below in dismissing her suit for declaration that suit schedule property is the absolute property granted in favour of her deceased husband. This appeal is filed with inordinate delay of 741 days. Hence, an application in I.A. No. 1/2013 is filed seeking condonation of delay.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant and perused the affidavit filed in support thereof. On going through the same it is seen that in paragraph No. 4 of the affidavit there in an attempt to explain reason for the delay in filing of the appeal which indicate that after the certified copy was secured by the counsel appearing for the appellant in the lower appellate Court, he sent the same to the appellant with advise to file an appeal before this Court. Thereafter she could not come to Dharwad immediately for the reason that she fell sick and as advised by the Doctor she has to take treatment. Therefore, she could not file appeal in time. It is also stated that she could not come to Dharwad immediately for filing appeal due to financial constraints also.

(3.) THIS Court having found that no proper reason is assigned for condonation of delay felt that merit of the case is required to be looked into. In the event of appellant has an excellent case on merit and she has suffered serious injustice which is required to be considered in this second appeal, this Court on technicalities cannot dismiss this appeal and deny her right to seek rectification of error if any committed by both the Courts below. Hence, judgments of both the Courts with reference to the grounds urged are looked into.