SAYED ZAHID HUSSAHSI, J.- A suit for specific performance instituted by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge, Sialkot vide judgment and decree date 18.7.1989 whereagainst the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sialkot on 9.5.1993. These judgments are sought to be assailed through this revision petition.
2. The learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection, at the very outset of the hearing of this petition, that the revision petition is time- barred and is liable to be dismissed for that reason, It is contended that by virtue of proviso added by Act VI of 1992 to Section 115, CPC revision petition" could be filed within a period of 90 days and since in this case the revision petition was not filed within the specified period the same is time-barred. Reliance in this context has been placed upon Haji M.
Ilyas and 2 others v. Mir Habib Jan (1997 M LD 551), Nasir-ud-Din v. Muhammad Bashir and another (1999 M LD 2999), Ajbar Khan and others v. Said Hakim Khan and others (1999 CLC 362) and Allah Yar and another v. Faiz Ahmad and 5 others (1999 CLC 713). The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contends that law favours adjudication on merits.
3. The appellate judgment was rendered by the learned Additional District Judge, Sialkot in this case on 9.5.1993. Attested copy whereof was supplied to the petitioner on 19.5.1993. Revision before this Court was, however, filed on 16.9.1993 in the first instance, whereas the period of 90 days expired on 19.8.1993, even if the period is computed from the date of delivery of the copy, revision petition thus was Undisputedly beyond the prescribed period of limitation. There is no justification brought-forth for explaining this delay. The objection thus taken by the learned counsel for the respondent is not only factually correct but also supported by the precedents cited by him. It thus prevails.
4. There can be no cavil that as far as possible adjudication should be made on merits. But it is equally settled law that with the expiry of period of limitation, valuable rights come to accrue in favour of the other side, which cannot be trampled or rendered nugatory, for no just cause.
As a result of the above without dilating upon the merits of the matter this petition is dismissed as time- barred. No order as to costs.