1.0. At the request of Ms. Parikh, learned advocate for the applicant, respondent no.1 stands deleted as she was already deleted before the lower Appellate Court. Registry is directed to amend the cause title of the present application as well as main Second Appeal (Stamp Number) No.47 of 2012 accordingly.
2.0. Present application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been preferred by the applicant -original plaintiff to condone the delay of 2709 days in preferring the appeal against the judgment and order passed by the District Court dated 15.7.2004 in Regular Civil Appeal No.103 of 1996.
3.0. Having heard Ms. Nisha Parikh, learned advocate for the applicant and Ms. Nayna Patel, learned advocate for Shri D.G. Chauhan, learned advocate for the respondents no. 4, 6 and 7 and though served nobody appears on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 3, 5 and 8 and considering the averment in the application in support of prayer to condone the delay submitting that against the judgment and order passed by the Appellate Court appellant approached the Legal Aid Committee and in fact the Legal Aid Committee appointed an advocate and handed over the papers to advocate but the advocate did not prefer the appeal and subsequently on inquiry the applicant came to know that concerned advocate who was engaged by the Legal Aid Committee did not prefer the appeal and thereafter immediately present appeal is preferred, as the delay has been sufficiently explained and so as to enable the applicant to submit the case on merits rather than non suiting him on technical ground of delay. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No costs. Registry is directed to notify the main Second Appeal for admission hearing on 23.7.2012.
( M. R. Shah, J. ) "kaushik"
Top