Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2623 (HP)

KARAM CHAND v. RAFTAR THAKUR AND ANR

CMP.M/298/2025 · 2026-03-11

Romesh Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Karam Chand vs. Raftar Thakur and another CMP(M) No. 298 of 2025 11.03.2026 Present:Ms. Shikha Thakur, Advocate, for the applicant/ applicant. Mr. Sanjay K. Sharma Advocate, for respondent No.2. Present application has been filed by the applicant/appellant for condonation of delay in filing the Regular Second Appeal. It has been averred in the application that the impugned judgment was passed by the learned Additional District Judge on 8.1.2024, whereby the judgment and decree as passed by the learned trial Court was upheld . In para 3 of the application, the reasons have been assigned stating that the applicant remained under treatment since 18.1.2023 on account of surgery on his leg in the IGMC, Shimla. Therefore, on that account he could not persue with the legal formalities and in that process delay has occurred which is neither intentional nor willful but the same has occurred under unavoidable circumstances which were beyond the control of the applicant. The application has been vehemently resisted by Mr. Sanjay K. Sharma, Advocate and he has prayed for dismissal of the application. Keeping in view the averments as made in the application, which is duly supported by an afÏdavit and in view of the submissions as made by learned counsel for the applicant, the delay of 10 months and 9 days in filing the Regular Second Appeal is condoned and the present application is allowed subject to cost of Rs.5000/- to be paid by the applicant to respondent No.2 within a period of four weeks, positively List on 28.04.2026. RSA _____of 2026(RSAST No. 6463/25) Appeal be registered. Heard. Admit on the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether both the Ld. Courts below have not appreciated the legal principle applicable to the suit of recovery and further committed illegality by decreeing the civil suit against the appellant/ defendant without any evidence and documentary proof of damage, if any as averred in the suit? 2. Whether the judgments and decrees as passed by both the Ld. Courts below and the findings given by them are perverse and unsustainable under the law? Record be requisitioned. List in due course. ( Romesh Verma) Judge March 11, 2026 ( veena)