' KHALIL AHMAD, J.--- Respondents Nos.1 to 3 filed suit for specific performance on 3-7-1988 of an agreement dated 8-9-1987 regarding land measuring 3 Kanals, 15 Marlas out of total area of 11 Kanals, 15 Marlas bearing Khata No,127/213, 215, Khasra Nos.162, 309, 310, 450 situated at village Hameedpur, Tehsil Pasrur District Sialkot. The suit was contested by the petitioners.
2. The learned trial Court after recording evidence of both the parties decreed the suit of the respondents vide judgment and decree. Dated 15-3-2003. The petitioner filed an appeal which was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge vide judgment and decree dated 28-5-2004.
Hence this revision.
3. Agreement heard. Record perused.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that judgments and decree of both the Courts below are against law and facts and result of misreading and non-reading of oral as well as documentary evidence available on record and that there was no agreement with respondents Nos.1 and 3.
5. The appeal of the petitioners was dismissed on 28-5-2004 and the revision was filed before this Court on 28-5-2005 which is patently time barred and learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to explain this inordinate delay in filing the revision within 90 days. Reliance in this regard is placed on NLR 2002 CLJ 704, 1975 SCM R 304. Learned counsel for the respondents further stated that section-5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable in Civil Revisions and reference in this regard may be made to 2006 SCM R 676, 2001 SCM R 286, 2002 M LD 1531. More over concurrent findings of fact cannot be interfered in revisional jurisdiction.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to point out any illegality, irregularity misreading and non-reading of record warranting interference by this Court in its revisional jurisdiction.
7. This Civil Revision is dismissed being time barred as well as on IB merit.