IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA  

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4981 OF 2008 [Arising out of SLP(C) NO.11331/2006]

HANMAVVA & ORS. .......APPELLANT(S)  

Versus

PETTIYA & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

Leave granted.  Heard both the counsel.

2. The  Appellants  had  filed  the  Second  Appeal  before  the  High  Court

challenging  the  order  of  the  Addl.  Civil  Judge  (Sr.  Division),  Raichur  in  R.A.

No.43/1999.  The Second Appeal was dismissed on the ground of delay of 725 days.   

3. The appellants have explained that they are agricultural labours who move

from place to place in search of work for their livelihood; that they came to know about

the judgment dated 21.3.2003 passed by the appellate Court only in April 2004 when

they returned to their village for celebrating Ugadi festival and they were informed about

the execution petition filed in the court of Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Deodurga; that when

they contacted their counsel, he advised them to appear in the execution case; that as all

of them are rustic illiterate agricultural labours without any economic support, they did

not comprehend the legal procedures and only  

......2.

- 2 -

a few days before the second appeal was filed,  they came to know that they should

challenge the judgment dated 21.3.2003; and that immediately they have taken steps to

file second appeal.   

4. We find that the explanation offered is satisfactory and sufficient to condone

the delay.  The High Court ought to have condoned the delay instead of dismissing the

appeal only on ground of delay.   

5. We, therefore, allow this appeal, set aside the order of the High Court dated

14.2.2006 rejecting the second appeal on the ground of delay.  As a consequence, the

second appeal stands restored to the file of the High Court and shall be disposed of in

accordance with law.

  ...........................J.    ( R.V. RAVEENDRAN )

New Delhi;    ...........................J. August 11, 2008.           ( LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA )