SATISH KUMAR MITTAL,J - (1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the petitioner for setting aside the order dated 15.1.2003 passed by the Additional District Judge, Mansa, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was dismissed and consequently the appeal preferred by him against the judgment and decree dated 18.7.2001 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mansa, was also dismissed as barred by limitation.
(2.) THE plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for possession of land measuring 24 kanals 12 marlas, as detailed and described in the head-note of the plaint. The plaintiff also challenged the sale deed dated 18.3.1994 as illegal and null and void. The trial Court dismissed the suit of the petitioner while holding that the defendants-respondents are bona fide purchasers. Against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, the petitioner preferred an appeal along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 25 days in filing the appeal. In the application, it was alleged that judgment and decree of the trial Court was passed on 18.7.2001 and on the next day the application for obtaining the certified copy was submitted. The copy was prepared and the same was ready for delivery on 8.8.2001. It was further alleged that the petitioner is a truck driver and had gone to Gujarat where he fell ill and, hence, could not file the appeal within limitation. As such, there is a delay of 25 days in filing the appeal.
(3.) THE first Appellate Court framed the issue on the aforesaid application to the effect whether the delay in filing the appeal is liable to be condoned. After taking evidence on the said issue, the application filed by the petitioner for condonation of delay was dismissed while holding that no sufficient grounds have been made out to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Hence, this revision.;