IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.1646 of 2009 Date of Decision:9.8.2011 Randhir Singh .... Appellant Versus Ujjagar Singh and others .... Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia Present: Mr. P.S. Bhangu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.K. Joshi, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.(Oral) The present revision petition has been filed to impugn the order dated 8.1.2009 passed by the District Judge, Ropar whereby he had dismissed the application for condonation of delay in filing the first appeal against the judgment and decree dated 22.2.2007 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Kharar. The petitioner was defendant No.4 to the suit filed for declaration by Surinder Singh. Respondents No.1 to 3 to the present petition are legal representatives of Surinder Singh. The suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff was decreed. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner had filed an appeal in the Court of District Judge, Ropar. Along with appeal, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was filed praying for delay of 2 months in filing the appeal be condoned. The lower Appellate Court noticed the facts that the petitioner in the trial Court was represented through Ajit Singh Kang as Attorney. The Court below further held that since the petitioner was represented by his counsel Sh. Amrik Singh, therefore, it is to be assumed that he was informed about the decision of the case. It was further held that it is not the case of the petitioner that he was not informed by his counsel. Thus, it was held that delay of 2 months in filing the appeal is not justifiable. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This Court is of the opinion that the Court should be liberal in C.R. No.1646 of 2009 -2- condoning the delay and the case ought to be decided on merits. Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The application of the petitioner for condonation of delay is accepted. District Judge, Ropar, is directed to decide the appeal afresh on merits within 3 months from the date of appearance of the parties. 09.08.2011 ( Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) rajeev Judge