Per Mr.S.M.Shembole, Hon`ble Presiding Judicial Member.

1.        None for revision petitioner is present, its counsel Shri.Avhad is also absent. Adv.Shri.S.A.Pradhan for respondent is present. He has already submitted written notes of argument on 28.6.2013.  Adv.Pradhan for respondent submitted that revision petition is being hopelessly barred by limitation is not maintainable.

2.      We have perused the record and find much force in the submission of Shri.Pradhan learned counsel  for respondent.  Because initially though the revision petitioner had filed the appeal it was not within limitation.  Even though no application for condonation of delay was filed.  Further as per order dated 3.3.2012 though the appeal is converted into revision, no steps are taken by revision petitioner to file application for condonation of delay.  When appeal is converted into revision petition vide order dated 03.3.2012 it will have to be considered that revision petition is filed on 3.3.2012. Therefore revision petition is not being filed or registered within the stipulated period of limitation, in the absence of application for condonation of delay same cannot be considered. On this ground also the revision petition deserves to be dismissed.  Anyhow since nobody for revision petitioner is present and revision petition is also barred by limitation it is dismissed.  No order as to cost.

Pronounced and dictated

in the open court on dt. 23.07.2013