Annapareddy Aireddy Vs.
Bolla Subba Reddy & Ors.  INSC 158 (27 January 2009)
JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.462 OF 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.22301 of
2007) Annapareddy Adireddy ...Appellant(s) Versus Bolla Subba Reddy and Ors.
O R D E R
In spite of service
of notice, nobody has entered appearance on behalf of the respondents to
contest the prayer made in this appeal.
Heard learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellant.
The Trial Court
decreed the suit ex-parte. Against the said order, an appeal was preferred
before the First Appellate Court along with an application under Section 5 of
the Limitation Act. The First Appellate Court refused to condone the delay of
ninety two days in filing the appeal and dismissed the appeal as barred by
limitation. The said order has been confirmed by the High Court in revision.
Hence, this appeal by special leave.
Having taking into
consideration the entire pros and cons of the matter, we are of the view that
the First Appellate Court was not justified in refusing to condone the delay in
filing the appeal and the High Court committed an error in confirming the said
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, impugned orders are set aside, delay in
filing the appeal before the First Appellate Court is condoned and the matter
is remitted to that Court to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law
after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties.