Judgment · High Court

V. RAMKUMAR & & K.HARILAL, JJ.= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = F.A.O. No. 70 of 2012= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =Dated: 24-02-2012JUDGMENTRamkumar, J.The appellant was the 1st judgment debtor inE.P.No.346/2009 in O.S.No.494/1988 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Kottayam. He challenges the dismissal ofhis petition under Order XXI Rule 90 C.P.C and the orderrefusing to condone the delay of 5 years and 15 days in filingthe said petition.2. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit thatthe appellant was not aware of the suit or the decree or thefiling of the E.P and he came to know the same only on15.06.2009 when delivery was effected. The court below didnot entertain the application for condoning the day since theprovisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act are not applicableto execution proceedings. The petition to condone the delay of5 years and 15 days was accordingly dismissed and F.A.O. No. 70 of 20122consequently the application under Order XXI Rule 90 C.P.Cwas also dismissed. The period of limitation starts from thedate of sale and not from the date of knowledge of sale evenassuming that the same can be believed. We find nojustification to entertain this appeal. This appeal is accordinglydismissed in limine, without prejudice to the appellant resortingto any other appropriate remedy available to him, if so advised.V. Ramkumar, Judge. K. Harilal, Judge.sj