Civil Revision No. 2333 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2333 of 2009 Date of decision : 19.3.2010 Smt. Beant Kaur ....Petitioner Versus Ajit Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Ms. Ruchi Shekhri, Advocate for Mr. Pankaj Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. B.R.Mahajan, Advocate for the respondent. S. D. ANAND, J. A suit filed by the plaintiffs-respondents against the petitioner herein was decreed by the learned Trial Court, vide judgment and decree dated 16.3.2007. The defendant-petitioner filed first appeal in the Court of learned District Judge, Amritsar. Along with the appeal, she also filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 124 days in filing thereof. The plea did not find favour with the learned Ist Appellate Court. The defendant-petitioner is in revision against it. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the defendant-petitioner is an illiterate lady and a widow and she was through out under the impression that a transfer application filed by her (for transfer of the case) was pending consideration at the hands of learned District Judge. Her learned counsel did not inform her about the disposal of the said transfer application and also about the disposal of the main suit. It is on that account only, the averment proceeds, that the appeal could not Civil Revision No. 2333 of 2009 -2- be filed in time. It is apparent from the impugned order that the plea raised by the defendant-petitioner is supported by only her self-serving statement. She did not examine either the learned counsel who represented her before the learned Trial Court or the Clerk of the learned counsel. It is they only who were eminently competent to own up the averment (made by the defendant-petitioner) to the effect that her learned counsel or latter's Clerk did not intimate decision of the transfer application and the main suit to her. In the absence thereof, she cannot be heard to argue that there is any inappropriateness on the part of the learned Ist Appellate Court in negativing the plea filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. In the light of foregoing discussion, the petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. March 18, 2010 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE