ARUN KUMAR GOEL - (1.)Heard learned Counsel. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 9th October, 2001, passed by the District Judge, Solan in Civil Appeal No. 37 of 2000; whereby while dismissing the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay filed by the appellants, he has also dismissed the appeal being time barred.
(2.)Learned lower appellate Court on examination of application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, was satisfied that no cause or reason muchless sufficient ground for condonation of delay was made out.
(3.)This case shows the seriousness with which those who are interested with protecting the interest of the State in law Courts are looking into the matters. After expiry of limitation four months thereafter appeal was filed before the lower appellate Court. It has been urged on behalf of the respondents that in case impugned order is set aside, it will tantamount to putting premium on the acts of negligence as well as remissness on the part of the petitioner -State. Per Mr. Sood, no cause muchless sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay. He has, therefore, prayed for dismissal of this revision petition on this short ground alone.