Hari Nath Tilhari, J. - (1.) This Civil Revision under Section 115 of C.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 18-2-92 passed by the Special Judge (E.C. Act) Lucknow/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lucknow, whereby the learned Additional District Judge rejected the applicants objections under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure in Execution Case No. 47/1985.
(2.) As per office report, this revision on 11-11-92 had been barred by 177 days. On behalf of the applicants an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been moved for condonation of delay and it has been averred in the affidavit sworn by the Section Officer of the Agriculture Department. U. P. Government Lucknow that the judgment and order impugned has been passed on 18-2-92. The lawyers in Civil Courts were on strike and later on the jurisdiction of the Lucknow judgeship had been transferred to the Judgeship of Unnao. The strike continued, according to deponent, till July, 1992 and, as a result of the same, applicant could not learn about the judgment in the case. It is further averred that when on 11-8-92. Amin of the Court came to Civil Courts with attachment order and attached the vehicle of the department then on 12-8-92, the officials of the department made inspection of the file in the Civil Courts and the applicant could learn that the applicants objections had already been rejected by order dated 18-2-92. The deponent in the affidavit had further averred that immediately thereafter on 20-8-1992 the deponent applied for the certified copy of the judgment and order dated 18-2-1992 and the certified copy became ready for being delivered on 31-8-1992 and it was received on that date i.e. 31-8-1992. It is further averred that on 1st September, 1992, the deponent referred the matter to the Shasan along with certified copy for necessary sanction and permission to approach the Hon'ble High Court and the necessary sanction and approval was finally accorded according to averment made in the affidavit on 22-10-92 and thereafter according to applicant, Diwali vacation intervened and courts were reopened on 27th October, 1992 on which date there was a reference as result of which the Court did not work. It is further averred that on 28th October, 1992, the department approached the office of the Chief Standing Counsel for allotment of the case and the case was allotted on November 3rd, 1992 and the revision was filed on 4-11-1992.
(3.) According to applicant, in view of these facts and circumstances, the revision could not be filed in time and delay in filing the same did occur which was not intentional but is genuine and bona fide and, therefore, it has been prayed that delay in filing the revision of 177 days be condoned. The notice of condonation of delay had been issued to the opposite party and on 4th May, 1993 the opposite party filed an objection to the application for condonation of delay supported by affidavit.;