SANDEEP MEHTA,J. - (1.) The instant appeal is preferred by the appellant against the order dated 14.10.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Banswara whereby the application filed by the appellants being the legal representatives of late Shri Bhura Lal the applicant before the learned Trial Court for being taken on record on the ground of delay was rejected.
(2.) The appellants being the legal representatives of Bhura Lal, resident of Banswara have filed an application in the Court of the learned District Judge, Banswara under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The matter was transferred to the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, Banswara. Bhura Lal expired during the pendency of the proceedings on which the applicants filed the application for being impleaded as applicants in place of Bhura Lal. The application was barred by limitation and thus, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was also moved alongwith the same. The learned Additional District Judge rejected the application.
(3.) Having heard and considered the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the impugned order, this Court feels that the learned Additional District Judge was totally unjustified in rejecting the prayer made by the applicants for being impleaded in place of Bhura Lal as applicants in the proceedings. The delay was not so great that it could not have been condoned. The explanation furnished for condonation of delay was justified. As the sole bread earner of the family expired, delay should have been condoned liberally. Thus, the appeal deserves to be accepted.;