Civil Revision No.5058 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.5058 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 07.12.2010 Ranjit Singh and another ....Petitioners Versus Nirmal Kaur ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. Vikas Bahl, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) Petitioner is impugning the order dated 17.5.2010 passed by the District Judge, Kapurthala, thereby rejecting the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, seeking condonation of 61 days in filing the appeal. Undisputedly, learned trial Court has decided the ad interim injunction application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC on 16.12.2009. Appeal from the order should have been filed within 30 days, which was filed after delay of 61 days with an application seeking condonation of delay. Having perused the application seeking condonation of delay and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I find that delay Civil Revision No.5058 of 2010 (O&M) -2- ought to have been condoned and appeal ought to have been decided in accordance with law. Petition is allowed. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Appellate Court is directed to decide the appeal in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the appellate Court on 22.12.2010. Petitioner shall pay Rs.5,000/- as cost to the respondent on or before the next date fixed before the appellate Court. (Alok Singh) Judge December 07, 2010 R.S.