NAVIN SINHA, J. - (1.) I.A. No. 1 of 2013 has been filed to condone delay of 257 days in preferring the appeal.
(2.) Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that against the impugned order dated 6.10.2012 dismissing Civil Suit No. 8-A of 2012 passed by the Additional District Judge, Kondagaon, the Appellant had initially preferred a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India bona fide, with alertness on 5.11.2012 itself. The writ petition after hearing the parties was dismissed on 7.8.2013 as not maintainable reserving liberty to the Appellant for availing remedies as available under the law. The present appeal has then been filed with due diligence as early as 19.9.2013. Since a wrong remedy was being pursued bona fide, it constitutes sufficient cause for condoning delay.
(3.) Learned Counsel for Respondents No. 1 and 2 opposing condonation of delay submitted that if a writ petition was filed which was not maintainable, as the appropriate remedy was an appeal, it cannot be said that a wrong remedy was being pursued bona fide.;