- (1.) THE appellants ­ defendants, Kalu Singh s/o Nagga Singh and others had filed the present first appeal, which is barred by limitation of 345 days as pointed out by the Registry, against the plaintiff, Dharmi Chand s/o Chandmal ­ the decree holder in the recovery suit filed by the plaintiff Dharmi Chand, which was decreed by the learned trial court of District Judge, Rajsamand in Civil Original Suit No.76/2005 ­ Dharmi Chand Jain vs. Kalu Singh & ors. for recovery of Rs.3,07,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum vide order dated 24.02.2007.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants ­ defendants has filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation for condonation of delay of 343 days caused in filing of the present first appeal. Along with the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, one of the defendants ­ appellants has adduced evidence in the form of a Medical Certificate issued by one Dr. U.L. Agwal of Bhilwara on 20.04.2007 in favour of Kalu Singh s/o Mangu Singh Rawat showing the disease as Typhoid and Anemia for complete one year from 20.04.2007 to 07.04.2008 for 354 days and Annexure B to the said application is the Fitness Certificate dated 08.04.2008 by the same Doctor. Both the certificates are printed as "challan receipts" only in which the blank columns have been filled up casually showing no treatment and medication taken by the appellant ­ defendant No.1 in between for curing of such diseases. The medical certificate does not inspire any confidence. In the absence of collateral evidence produced by the defendant ­ appellant, the same appears to have been produced for covering complete period of one year delay caused in filing the present first appeal on 10.04.2008. There were other defendants ­ appellants available to file the appeal. On last occasion, when the matter was listed for admission / hearing on defect side on 26.05.2011, learned counsel for the appellant ­ defendant, Mr. Arvind Samdariya sought time to take instructions whether the present appeal is to be pressed or not and whether decree has been executed or not since three years have passed by since the impugned decree is dated 24.02.2007.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant ­ defendant, Mr. Arvind Samdaria even today has shown his inability to inform the Court about the instructions and was also unable to show any further good cause for condonation of huge delay in filing the present appeal.;