S.C. Pandey, J.

1. This is an application for review of the order dated 14-2-2000 passed by this Court, whereby Second Appeal No. 126/99 was dismissed.

2. The lower appellate Court had dismissed the first appeal on the ground that it was barred by time. In the second appeal, the judgment and decree of the trial Court was maintained, for the reason given in the impugned order dated 14-2-2000.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant argued that the impugned order dated 14-2-2000 requires reconsideration on the ground that initially learned Additional District Judge had admitted the appeal as within time and thereafter at the time of final hearing dismissed it on the ground that the appeal was obviously barred by limitation without giving the applicant any opportunity of getting the delay condoned. Learned counsel for the applicant relied on the decision of Suresh Kumar and Ors. vs. Firm Kurban Hussain Taiyab Ali and others, reported in 1996 MPLJ 330 : AIR 1996 MP 151 for his contention that the applicant should have been given an opportunity for getting the delay condoned by filing an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. In the opinion of this Court, the contention of le