- (1.) The plaintiff is in revision petition aggrieved against the order passed by the learned First Appellate Court on 5.8.2003, whereby delay of eight months in filing of appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court was not condoned.
(2.) The plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration challenging the order dated 21.7.1998, whereby the defendants stopped his two annual increments. The said suit was dismissed by the learned trial Court on 19.9.2001. An appeal against the said judgment and decree was filed along with an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal on the ground that his counsel suggested him not to come on hearings of the case and whenever he feels any need, he will call him. Therefore, the decision of the suit was not known to him.
(3.) The learned first Appellate Court found that the petitioner has not shown any sufficient cause for condonation of delay. The petitioner is working as conductor and that he has taken only oral plea. Thus, it was found that there does not exist any sufficient cause to seek condonation of delay. The reasoning given by the learned first Appellate Court, is wholly unjustified and defeats the cause of justice. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy 1999(1) Civil Court Cases 12 (SC) has held that delay in filing the appeal should not be examined from a pedantic point of view but with a view whether any benefit is sought to be raised by the suitor. Since the appeal was directed against the judgment and decree, whereby his suit was dismissed, no benefit could crue to the plaintiff by filing the appeal belatedly.;