1. ' HAMID ALI MIRZA, J.---These civil petitions for leave to appeal are directed against an order, dated 22-2-2000 passed by a learned Judge in Chambers of Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby Civil Miscellaneous Application No, 1/C of 1999 in Civil Revision Nos.411-D and 412-D of 1999 moved by the respondents for condonation of delay was allowed subject to payment of Rs,2,000 as costs.
2. ' We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
3. ' The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no medical certificate in respect of the ground for condonation of delay was filed by the respondents and further that section 5 of the Limitation Act was not applicable for condonation of delay in filing a civil 'revision under section 115, C.P.C.
4. ' The learned Judge in Chambers in the concluding paragraph of the impugned order has observed:-- ' "I have given due consideration to the valuable arguments on both sides. As the application for condonation of delay on the ground of applicant's attorney suffering from high fever beyond his control is supported by an affidavit and there is no counter-affidavit, I consider it a sufficient cause for condonation of delay for not filing the Revision Petition within the prescribed period of limitation.
5. However, the applicant is burdened with costs of Rs,2,000."
6. It is not for all the time necessary to file medical certificate in case illness is taken as a ground for condonation of delay when other reliable material is available to support the said ground of ailment and no rebutting material has been brought on record by the contesting party. In the instant case, no counter-affidavit was filed by the petitioner to deny as to what was stated by the respondent with regard to his ailment. No plea was even taken before the learned Judge in Chambers of High Court that section 5 of the Limitation Act was not applicable in the civil revision.
7. The learned Judge, in view of the material on record, found that sufficient cause was made out for condonation of delay. The said finding of fact, in the circumstances, cannot be interfered with by this Court. So far the contention that section 5 of the Limitation Act would not apply for condonation of delay in case of civil revision filed under section 115, C.P.C., we may observe that this point can be decided later on in some other appropriate matter. In view of the aforesaid reasonings, we find that the petitions have no merit, therefore, leave to appeal is refused and the same are dismissed.