Law: Limitation Act (IX of 1908)

Section: 5

  Limitation Act (IX of 1905) S. 5-Limitation-Delay, condonation of-Delay in filing applica tion for grant of copy due to mistaken advice of counsel-Counsel admitting fact-Delay condoned-Cases remanded. Date of hearing : 29th August 1975.                                                                                                                              JUDGMENT There are two appeals filed against one order passed by the learned, District Judge, Hyderabad. One of the appeals is against the order refusing to condone the delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act and the other is against the order of dismissal of the appeal. In fact, one appeal would have been sufficient. These have arisen in the following circumstances and will be disposed of by a common judgment. 2. House No. F. 67/1283 situated at Giddu Road, Hyderabad, was transferred to the appellant under the Settlement Scheme, and the P. T. D. was issued on 1-6-1962. 3. The appellant filed an application under section 13 of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance against the present respondents on the ground of default, personal requirement and subletting. The applica tion ultimately came to be dismissed by the Rent Controller. The appellant then filed an appeal in the Court of the District Judge, Hyderabad. 4. The application had been dismissed by the learned Rent Controller, Hyderabad on 28-11-1970, and the appellant made the application for the grant of copy of the order on 2-1-1971. It is an admitted position that the winter vacations had commenced in the District Court of Hyderabad from 24th December 1970 ending on 1-1-1971. The copy of the order was supplied to the appellant on 8-1-1971 and the appeal was preferred the same day. 5. The learned District Judge dismissed the appeal only on the ground of limitation. He was of the opinion that once the time had started…