Full Judgment Text
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.6641 OF 2012
(SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(C.)NO.27883 OF 2010)
DEVINENI PADMAJA APPELLANT
VERSUS
VUNDAVALLI SRINIVASA RAO RESPONDENT
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and
order passed by the High Court of Judicature of Andhra
Pradesh at Hyderabad in Civil Revision Petition
No.1188 of 2009, dated 26.3.2010. By the impugned
order, the High Court has allowed the Revision
Petition and has directed the lower Appellate Court to
decide the case on merits.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties to
JUDGMENT
the lis.
4. Plaintiff's suit was for recovery of a sum of
Rs.2,35,100/- with interest thereon. The suit was
based on a pro-note. The Trial Court had decreed the
suit.
5. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and
decree passed by the Trial Court, the Defendant had
filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court.
Cont..2/-
Page 1
:2:
Since there was a delay of 992 days in filing the
appeal, they had also filed an application under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The First
Appellate Court rejected that application and
consequently, the appeal was also rejected. Being
aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Defendant had
filed a Civil Revision Petition before the High Court
being Civil Revision Petition No.1188 of 2009.
6. The High Court, after hearing the parties, has
allowed the Civil Revision Petition and has set aside
the orders passed by the lower Appellate Court.
Further, the Court had directed the Defendant to
deposit half of the decretal amount within six weeks'
from the date of receipt of the copy of the Court's
order. Further, the Court had permitted the Plaintiff
to withdraw half of the amount so deposited.
7. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the High
JUDGMENT
Court, the Plaintiff is before us in this appeal.
8. During the pendency of this appeal, we had
directed the Defendant to deposit a sum of
Rs.2,50,000/-. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the
Defendant has deposited the aforesaid amount before
this Court.
9. We also note that pursuant to the directions
issued by the High Court, the Defendant has also
deposited a sum of Rs.1,17,550/-.
Cont..3/-
Page 2
:3:
10. We have gone through the orders passed by the
High Court. In our view, in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the High Court was
justified in condoning the delay in filing the appeal
by the Defendant and further directing the Defendant
to deposit certain amounts.
11. In view of the above, while disposing of the
appeal, we permit the Plaintiff to withdraw a sum of
Rs.2,50,000/- deposited by the Defendant before this
Court. However, he is restrained from withdrawing any
amount deposited by the Defendant before the Trial
Court.
12. In view of the disposal of the appeal, now the
First Appellate Court shall decide the appeal on
merits, as directed by the High Court while disposing
of the Civil Revision Petition No.1188 of 2009.
Ordered accordingly.
JUDGMENT
.......................J.
(H.L. DATTU)
.......................J.
(CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD)
NEW DELHI;
SEPTEMBER 17, 2012
Page 3