JUDGMENT : Hearon I. A. No. 3133/09, appellant's application under Section 5 of the LimitationAct for condoning the delay in filing the proceedings for setting aside theabatement of the appeal caused on account of non-taking the appropriate stepsfor bringing the legal representatives of deceased respondent No. 2 on recordwithin the prescribed period. The same is filed barred by near about ten years. 2.The appellant being aged 87 years is not physically well person. He did notaware about the legal position that after the death of respondent No. 2, theappropriate steps to bring her legal representatives on record was necessary.Hence, since 1998 he did not consult the Counsel in this regard. On receivingthe information in this regard from the Counsel on 23-3-09 immediately he cameto Jabalpur then he came to know about the aforesaid. On which along with this LA. the proceedings for setting aside the abatement of the appeal and also for bringingthe legal representatives of deceased respondent No. 2 on record is filed. Insuch premises the prayer for condoning the delay of round about 10 years infiling such proceeding is made. 3.In reply of the respondent No. 1, the averments of the aforesaid applicationexplaining the cause of delay are specifically denied. It is stated that inspite knowing the death of respondent No. 2, voluntarily no steps were taken bythe appellants' within the prescribed period of limitation. In such premises,no sufficient cause could be inferred for condoning the alleged delay of 10years in filing the aforesaid proceedings. Besides this, the ignorance of lawcould not be treated to be a ground for condoning the alleged delay. As persubmission of the respondent's Counsel the appeal has already been abatedagainst such respondent and prayed for dismissal of this application. 4.In spite service of notice of this application on the proposed legalrepresentatives of deceased respondent No. 2, no one has objected the same byfiling its reply. 5.Having heard the Counsel, on perusing the record and the averments of theapplication, it is apparent that the appellant being person of more than 80years of the age is a resident of village area of Tehsil and District Hoshangabad , he also appears to be an uneducated person andagriculturist. In such background of the appellant, itcould not be inferred that in spite knowing the legal procedure he did not takethe appropriate steps. In such background of the appellant, itcould not be inferred that in spite knowing the legal procedure he did not takethe appropriate steps. In such circumstances, in my opinion this I. A. must beconsidered by adopting some lenient view with justice oriented approach. Mysuch view is fully fortified with the principle laid down by the apex Court inthe matter of Ram Sumiran and others Vs. D.D.C. andothers, reported in AIR 1985 SC 606 . In such case, taking into considerationthat the concerned appellant's being uneducated rustic villagers were theagriculturists and did not aware with the legal position about bringing thelegal representatives on record, the delay of 6 years in filing theapplications for setting aside the abatement and bringing the legalrepresentatives, on record was condoned. 6.In the aforesaid premises, it is held that appellant's has made out sufficientcause for condoning the aforesaid delay in filing the aforesaid proceedings forsetting aside the abatement hence, by allowing the LA. the entire delay is hereby condoned. 7.After condoning the aforesaid delay, the LA. No. 3137/09, appellant'sapplication under Order 22 Rule 9 of CPC for setting aside the aforesaidabatement is taken up for consideration. 8.For the reasons on which the aforesaid IA is allowed, this IA is also allowedand the alleged abatement of the appeal of the respondent No. 2 is hereby setaside. In pursuance of it, I. A. No. 3133/09 an application under Order 22 Rule4 of CPC is taken up for consideration. The proposed personsappears to be legal representatives of the deceased respondent No. 2hence, the same is allowed. 9.Appellant's Counsel is directed to carry out the necessary corrections in thisregard in the array of appeal memo within seven days failing which, this appeal shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference tothe Bench. 10.It being an old appeal pending since 1997 for adjudication, hence subject toaforesaid corrections in the record, be listed forfinal hearing on some early date.