JUDGMENT :

SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J.

1. Plaintiffs in the suit filed above second appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 21.04.2017 in A.S. No. 60 of 2012 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Adoni, confirming the judgment and decree dated 23.04.2012 in O.S. No. 170 2006 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Alur.

2. For the sake of convenience and brevity, parties to this judgment are referred to as per their array in suit.

3. Plaintiffs filed the suit O.S. No. 170 of 2006 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Alur seeking declaration of title and for grant of permanent injunction. Deceased 1st plaintiff pleaded in the plaint that he is the absolute owner of plaint schedule property and the same was purchased by his father about 37 years back; that in the oral partition between 1st plaintiff and his brother, plaint schedule property was allotted to 1st plaintiff; that defendants are trying to dispossess the 1st plaintiff in high handed manner and caused damage to the standing crop; that he filed suit O.S. No. 1of 2006 against Cherukuru Ramanjinappa and Goturu Govindu seeking injunction and the said suit was decreed; that since the defendants are interfering with 1st plaintiff, the above suit was filed.

4. 1st Defendant filed written statement and contended interalia that 1st plaintiff filed suit O.S. No. 100 of 1998 for permanent injunction alleging that he is the owner of land in S. No. 1-B/3/B and produced pattadar pass book, whereas he is holding an extent of Ac. 2.58 cents in S. No. 1A/B3B; that defendant produced certificate issued by the M.R.O. stating that S. No. 1-B/3/B is not in existence; that suit O.S. No. 100 of 1998 was dismissed on 07.07.2005 and against the said judgment, plaintiff filed appeal A.S. No. 17 of 2005 and the same was dismissed on 02.11.2005; that later plaintiff filed collusive suit O.S. No. 1 of 2006 and the defendants therein remained ex-parte and thus, the suit O.S. No. 1 of 2006 was decreed; that plaintiff suppressed filing of suit O.S. No. 100 of 1998 and A.S. No. 17 of 2005; that plaintiff has nothing to do with plaint schedule property and in fact, 1st defendant is owner of the schedule property and he is in possession and enjoyment of the same; that defendants 2 and 3 are relatives of 1st defendant and prayed to dismiss the suit.

5. Trial Court on consideration of both oral and documentary evidence, dismissed the suit with costs vide judgment and decree dated 23.04.2012. Pending the suit, sole plaintiff died and his legal representatives were brought on record as plaintiffs 2 to 6. Aggrieved by the same, plaintiffs filed appeal A.S. No. 60 of 2012 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Adoni. Lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal vide judgment and decree dated 21.04.2017. Assailing the same, the present second appeal is filed with a delay of 1663 days.

6. Lower appellate Court pronounced the judgment on 21.04.2017 and application to get the certified copy was filed on 27.11.2019. Copy was made ready on 21.12.2019. However, appeal was filed on 04.03.2022.

7. 3rd Appellant deposed to the affidavit filed in support of the petition to condone the delay of 1663 days. Paragraph-6 of the affidavit, wherein reasons were assigned to condone the delay is extracted below:

“I submit that the lower appellate Court was pleased to dismiss the appeal vide judgment and decree dated 21.04.2017. I obtained the certified copies of the judgment and decree of the Courts below to file the present second appeal. Unfortunately, they were misplaced. In tracing those misplaced papers, there occurred delay. In the meantime, the Hon’ble High Court was bifurcated and subsequently Covid-19 is intervened. My mother, the 2nd appellate suffered severe old age aliments and I totally attended to my mother in getting her health recovered by providing various Allopathic and Ayurved medicine. Hence, I could not approach the counsel at Amaravathi to file the present second appeal. In the second w