TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1470X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limitation Act to condone the delay of 339 days in filing the petition for restoration of the suit which is filed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the usage of 'Rasta'. No doubt the petitioner has not explained the reasons for the delay in his application. But, the court should have considered the same by imposing some costs. Ordinarily, the litigation should not be terminated by default, either of the plaintiff or the defendant. The cause of justice does require that as far as possible adjudication is done on merits. Though the suit is of the year 2012, still the same is pending and if the said application is not considered, the rights of the petitioner will be affected. Keeping in view of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not keeping good health and his counsel before the court below on that particular day was in some other court conducting trial work. Due to ill health the petitioner did not contact the counsel for filing the petition for restoration of suit as such occurred delay in filing the petition for restoration of the above suit. 3. The respondents/defendants filed counter opposing the same. The court below after hearing both parties, dismissed the said application vide its order dated 12.12.2022. Aggrieved thereby, the present revision is filed. 4. Heard Mr. Y.Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.Sarvotham Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner in elaboration to what has been raised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... while dismissing, observed that the petitioner in his chief examination affidavit stated that he is not having good health and unable to contact his counsel to file his chief examination affidavit. Whereas, in the cross examination, it is stated that on the day of dismissal of the suit i.e., OS. No. 5 of 2012, he approached his counsel which is contrary to the pleadings mentioned in the affidavit. The court below by taking into consideration the judgment reported in Kommidi Mahender Reddy Vs. Kommidi Suryamma 2007 (3) ALT 619 has dismissed the application through the said judgment is not applicable to the present facts of the case. 8. Learned counsel further contended that time and again Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner has not explained the reasons for the delay in his application. But, the court should have considered the same by imposing some costs. 12. Ordinarily, the litigation should not be terminated by default, either of the plaintiff or the defendant. The cause of justice does require that as far as possible adjudication is done on merits. Though the suit is of the year 2012, still the same is pending and if the said application is not considered, the rights of the petitioner will be affected. Keeping in view of the same, this court is inclined to consider the revision by passing following order. 13. The Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the order passed in IA. No. 1532 of 2018 in OS. No. 5 of 2012 dated 12.12.2022 on the fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
