IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE 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.      ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Leave granted.

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 order.

...2/-

- 2 -  

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.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, January 27, 2009.