- (1.)THE petitioner has filed this revision under section 115 of CPC, against the order dated 10.8.1999 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Dhar in civil Misc. appeal No. 4/99 by which learned Additional District Judge has affirmed the order dated 30.4.99 of the Additional Civil Judge, Class -II, Dhar in civil suit No. 52 -A/97 granting temporary injunction in favour of the respondents under the provisions of Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.)THIS revision has been filed 30 days beyond the prescribed period of limitation and accordingly, the petitioner has filed an application IA No. 6277/99 under section 5 of the Limitation Act to seek condonation of delay. The ground mentioned in the application is that an application for certified copy of the impugned order was made on 12.8.99 and it was received on 18.8.99 and thereafter, the Government Pleader sent his opinion on 28.8.99 to the Collector for filing the present revision. The Collector forwarded the proposal for filing of this revision on 1.9.99 to the Law and Legislative Department of the State. The Law Department then sought clarification in the matter on 9.11.99 and after receiving reply thereto and processing the case further, the sanction was granted on 26.11.99. Thereafter, the Officer Incharge of the case representing the State was busy in election and revision could be filed on 13.12.99, only.
From the averments made in the application, it is clear that the sanction had been granted after the expiry of period of limitation. It is noticed from the application that although the proposal had reached the Law Department on 1.9.99, the first querry was made by the Law Department on 9.11.99. Nothing has been brought on record to indicate as to how the matter was processed and dealt with to explain the delay nor has it been stated that it was due to the lethargy or negligence of any individual and therefore, no case for condonation of delay has been made out. There being no plausible explanation for the delay the IA No. 6277/99 is rejected. Consequently, this revision is dismissed, as time barred.