Civil Revision No.5368 of 2011(O&M) #1# IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No.5368 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision:-05.09.2011 M/s Industrial Organics Ltd. ......Petitioner. Versus M/s Llyods Insulation(India)Ltd. ......Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr. A.A. Pathak, Advocate for the Petitioner. *** JASWANT SINGH, J.(ORAL) Petitioner has filed the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution for setting aside the order dated 02.06.2011 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Barnala whereby application filed by the plaintiff/respondent under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was allowed and delay of 06 days in filing appeal condoned. Facts necessary for the disposal of the instant petition are that plaintiff/respondent filed an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 10.09.2009 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge(Sr. Divn.), Barnala whereby its suit was dismissed by the learned Trial Court with costs. Along with the appeal an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of 06 days delay in filling the appeal was also filed. The learned Appellate Court after hearing learned Counsel for both the parties Civil Revision No.5368 of 2011(O&M) #2# allowed the said application subject to payment of Rs.600/- as costs vide impugned order dated 02.06.2011. Hence the present revision petition. Learned Counsel for the defendant/petitioner submits that learned Appellate Court has not appreciated the facts of the case properly while allowing the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. It is further submitted that learned appellate Court has not taken into consideration the fact that respondent/plaintiff neither sought condonation of delay for 13 days for the period when the copy of judgment was prepared and till the day of delivery nor the same was discussed by the learned Appellate Court in its order allowing the said application. It is further submitted that the impugned order is a non speaking order and passed without appreciating the facts of the case while allowing application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act thereby condoning the delay of 06 days in filling the appeal. After hearing learned Counsel for the plaintiffs/petitioners and going through the record, I find no illegality in the order passed by the learned Appellate Court. Learned Appellate Court has decided the application for condonation of delay by framing issues and leading evidence on the same. Proper opportunity was given to the defendant/petitioner to contest the said application, but it has not controverted the stand taken by the plaintiff/respondent as none of its representative has chosen to step into the witness box to support its claim/case. Further the application under Section 5 of Limitation Act was allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs.600/- to be paid to the defendant/petitioner. In my considered view, the learned Appellate Court has not committed any error or illegality by allowing the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act subject to Civil Revision No.5368 of 2011(O&M) #3# payment of costs of Rs.600/- and hence I find no ground to allow the present petition. Dismissed. ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE September 05, 2011 Vinay