Prafulla C. Pant, J. - (1.) THIS is Delay Condonation Application No. 1474 of 2009, for condonation of delay in moving the Restoration Application M.C.C. No. 106 of 2009.
(2.) 31 day's delay in moving the restoration application is sufficiently explained in the affidavit accompanying the application. The application is allowed. Delay is condoned. Also heard on restoration application. The memorandum of appeal was rejected as barred by time on 16.12.2008, as none appeared to press the delay condonation application, on that day. In the affidavit accompanying the restoration application, absence on the date fixed is sufficiently explained. Therefore, the restoration applica tion is allowed. Defective Second Appeal No. 27 of 2007 is restored to its origi nal number.
(3.) ALSO, heard on delay condonation application moved in filing the ap peal against the judgment and decree dated 25.6.2007, passed by District Judge, Bageshwar, in Civil Appeal No. 01 of 2006, There is delay of 78 days in filing the appeal which is sufficiently explained in the affidavit accompanying the delay condonation application. Therefore, the delay condonation application is allowed. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Also, heard on admission of the appeal and perused the impugned judgment and decree dated 25.6.2007, passed by the First Appellate Court (District Judge, Bageshwar) in Civil Appeal No. 01 of 2006, whereby the judg ment and decree dated 27.4.2006, passed by the Trial Court, in Suit No. 15 of 2005, is affirmed.;