1. The present Civil Application u/s.5 of the Limitation Act has been preferred by the applicant herein - appellant - original plaintiff to condone the huge delay of 431 days in preferring the second appeal against the judgement and decree dated 21/12/2010 passed by learned Additional District Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Rajpipla, Narmada in Regular Civil Appeal No.17 of 2008 and Regular Civil Suit No.76 of 1993.
2. While submitting the present application to condone the delay of 431 days in preferring the appeal, the applicant has come out with the following grounds :
"4.1 The judgement and award passed in Regular Civil Appeal No.17 of 2008 dated 21.12.2010. The appellant's advocate has applied for certified copy on 22.12.2010, which was ready on 13.01.2011. Hence, calculating 90 days from 21-12-2010, the last date was 20-3-2011. However, adding up 15 days gone in securing certified copies, the last date for filing the appeal was 04-04-2011.
4.2 The applicant, however, states that due to some personal difficulties and domestic circumstances, the applicant could not collect the certified copy immediately from his advocate. Moreover, after understanding the contents of the judgement of the learned Additional District Court, he took some more time to decide: Whether to go for appeal or not.
4.3 The applicant, being almost illiterate person was in vain with respect to the further proceedings to be initiated by him. He, then, contacted his advocate and who in turn advised him to file an appeal in the Hon'ble High Court.
4.4 The applicant's advocate, then, contacted another advocate at Ahmedabad for the same and the copies were sent to study the same. The applicant was having very limited resources at that time.
4.5 Meanwhile, the time for filing an appeal is elapsed and he could not prefer an appeal. All the same, in the last week of December-2011, the applicant came to know about the judgement and decree passed in another Regular Civil Appeal No.37 of 2011, which was dismissed by the same first appellate court and the subject matter of the suit property was also the same."
2. Therefore, considering the above, it can be said that the averments in the application to condone the delay is to vague and the same cannot be said to be making out a sufficient cause to condone the huge delay of 431 days. Nothing has been mentioned with respect to personal difficulties and domestic circumstances as alleged in para-4.2 of the application. Nothing has been mentioned on which date the applicant contacted his advocate and who in turn advised him to file an appeal. Nothing has been mentioned when the applicant contacted another advocate in Ahmedabad. It appears from Para 4.5 of the application that as such the applicant accepted the judgement and order passed by learned Appellate Court. However, in view of the order passed in some another appeal, which according to the applicant is with respect to very subject matter, thereafter he decided to prefer an appeal. Under the circumstances when no sufficient cause has been shown at all to condone the huge delay of 431 days and considering the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Post Master General and others V/s. Living Media India Ltd. and Anr. reported in (2012)3 SCC 563, the present application, which has been submitted to condone the huge delay of 431 days deserves to be dismissed.
3. In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, as no sufficient cause has been shown to condone the huge delay of 431 days, the present application deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
[M.R.SHAH,J] *dipti Top