SHIB SADHAN SADHU, J.

By filing the instant revisional application, the petitioners seek to set aside/quash the impugned judgment and order dated 29th April, 2015 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court, Bichar Bhawan, Calcutta in Criminal Appeal No. 54 of 2014 dismissing the appeal ex parte for non-appearance of the appellants/petitioners on the date of final hearing. The petitioners have also filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condo nation of delay of 181 days in preferring this revisional application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were absolutely dependent upon their learned conducting advocate in the matter of prosecuting the appeal before the appellate court, but, unfortunately, their learned advocate did not appear on the dates of hearing and as a result, the appeal was heard and decided ex parte. The petitioners were in complete dark and had no knowledge about such ex parte disposal of the appeal. Their learned advocate did not give any intimation to them. Consequently