/£ \;c .- .r/t- ^s^. < : HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISQARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) N0. S421 OF 2009 PETITIONER rAPPELLANTl RESPONDENTS 1 Gulam Sayyad, aged about 65 years, S/o Sayyad Ahmad Musaiman, R/o Vill. Simga, Tah. & P.S. Simga, District Raipur (C.G.) Versys Mangal Chand S/o Uttam Chand Parakh, aged about 70 years, R/o 24 Avenue Choubey Colony, Raipur (C.G.). 2. Chintaram S/o Pancham Ram Dewangan, aged about 50 years,R/o Vill. Paunsari, Tah. & P.S. Simga, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226/2270F THE CONSTITUTiON OF IND1A (Sinate Bench: Hon'ble Mr. N.K. Aaarwal. J.S Present Shri Saif Khan, counsel for the petitioner. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 16th day of November, 2009) The instant petition arises out of the order dated 01-07-2009 passed in C.A. No.04/2008 by Second Additional District Judge, Baloda Bazar, District Raipur. 2. The facts briefly stated are as under: An application under Order 7 Rule 11 ofthe C.P.C. has been fiied by the respondents herein jn the suit filed by the plaintiff/appellant for its rejectlon on the ground that the suit is time barred. 3. Learned Triai Court allowed the application flted by the defendants and dismissed the suit holding the suit as time barred. The petitioner went in appeal which was also dismissed. 4. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that although the suit is time barred, but the Courts should be liberai in condoning the delay, the delay caused in fillng the suit pught to have been condoned by the trial Court exereising power under Section 5 of tbe Limitation Act, (for short 'the Act'). -a:,.is«uus.jR.. ^BS ^ 5. ! have heard leamed counsel for the petitloner and perused the order impugned. 6. Admittedly, the suit was time barred. The Court can condone the delay under Section 5 of the Act, if any appeal or any application other than an application under any provisions under Order 21 of the C.P.C. is fiied belatedly and if such appellant/applicant satisfies the Court that he hadsufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or make an application within such period, but the delay in filing the suit cannot be condoned under the said provision, as the same is not made applicable in case of a Civil Suit. As per Section 3 of the Act, every suitfiled after prescribed period is liable to be dismissed. 7. In view of the above, the learned Triat Court has not committed any illegatity or irregularity in passing the order impugned. The petition being devoid of substance is liabte to be and is hereby dismissed. K»- Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge -^W^"9"'^-"'^•^^'•^".-t^:'