^°7 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Second Appeal No.3 of 2007 APPELLANTS/: (Defendants) 1< Koshelal, aged about 70 years, S/6 Shri Gayadeen Dhobi (siace dead), through his Legal Representatives: - A. Smt. Usha Bai alias Miinni Bai, wife of Butara, R/o \^llage Rumgaon. 2. Oorelal, aged about 40 years, S/o Shri Koshelal Dhobi. 3. Bhaiya Lal, aged about 37 years, S/o Shri Koshelal. 4. Babulal, aged about 35 years, S/o Shri Koshelal. AU are residents of Nagar Pendra Road, Tah. Pendra Road, Distt. BUaspur(C.G.) Versus 1. Mus. Parvati Bai, aged about 55 years, widow of Late Hemraj, R/o Nagar Pendra Road. 2. State of Madhya Pradesh (now Chhattisgarh), through District CoUector, BUaspur. 3. State of Madhya Pradesh (now CIihattisgarh, fhrough Sub Revenue Ofiicer, Revenue Sub Circle Pendra Road, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur {Second appeal under Section 100 oftheCode ofCivil Procedure, 1908} RESPONDENTS/: (Plaintiffs) Present: Mr. AshokSoru, counsel for the appellants. Mrs. Hamida Siddique, counsel for respondent No. 1. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Agrawal, Panel Lawyer for the State/ respondents No.2 & 3. Sinffle Bench: HonTble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J ORALJUDGMBNT (3-7-2009) 1. This is fhe second appeai on fhe following substantial question of law: - "Whefher leamed 1st appeUate Court was justified in rejecting fhe appeal as barred by tunitation on //"'"" '%gi»^t; \ r^/ the ground that the appellant failed to explain delay of 30 days m preferrmg the appeal?" 2. Short and single substantial question of law is involved in this second appeal. The present appellant^defendants have preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge (F.T.C.), Pendra Road against fhe judgment 8& decree dated 7-10-98 passed by fhe dvU Judge Class-I, Pendra Road ui Civil Suit No. 144A/86, whichwasregistered as Misc. CtvilCase No.8/2002. Vide order dated 6-12-2006 leamed Additional Distdct Judge has dismissed fhe above misceManeous civil case on fhe ground of limitation. 3. According to fhe order impugned and record of the Courts below, the miscellaneous eivil case has been filed after 30 days of its lunitation. 4. Leacned counsel for ttie appellants submits fhat the appeHants have explained the delay in filing the miscellaneous civil case, but the leanied-Court below has not considered fhe same. 5. On the other hand, leamed counsel appearmg on behalf of the respondents submit fhat fhe appeUants were required to explain the delay of each day in filing the misceUaneous civil case, satisfactorily. 6. Application for condonation of delay tn filing fhe miscellaneous civil case was filed by fhe appeUants in which fhey have mentioned fhat fhe judgment & decree was decided ex parte and when they cmne to know about the judgment 8& decree, they filed the miscellaneous civil case and it was filed after one monfh ofits limitation. Delay in filing the miseellaneous civil was bonafide. 7. Parties are reqiiired to explain fhe delay pf each day satisfactorily, but fhe Courte are required to take liberal view and decide fhe application for condonation of delay objectively. Admittedly, fhe appeal/miscellaneous civil case before fhe first appellate Court was filed after 30 days ofits limitation and the ground mentioned ia fhe application for condonation of delay reveals fhat fhe present appellants have satisfactorily explained fhe delay in filing the appeal, but fhe Court below has not considered the same and thereby cominitted Ulegalily. Even in case of insufficiency party ^f ^hould not be denied from availtng appropriate remedy before fhe competent Court and fhat caa be c<|mpensated by unposir^ cost in appropriate cases. Therefore, the order impugned is not sustainable. 8. Consequently, the substantial question of law is decided as negative, as of result fhe appeal is allowed and fhe order tmpugned is set aside. The appellants shaU pay cost of Rs. 1,000/- to respondent No. 1. The Court below shall dedde the appeal/miscellaneous civU case afresh on merits after afibrding opportunily ofhearing to the parties. No order as to costs. 9. Decree be drawn up accordingty. *ma Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge