SUNIL KUMAR & ANR Vs. USHA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.M. No.46611/2018(exemption)

(2.) The present appeal is accompanied by two applications for condonation of delay. One application for condonation of delay is CM No. 46612/2018 praying for condonation of delay of 382 days in filing of the appeal. The only ground given in this application for condonation of delay is that the appellants/defendants were advised by their advocate to not file this appeal because some other case was filed by the appellants/defendants, and which in my opinion is quite clearly an unacceptable reason for not having filed the appeal within limitation and the resultant delay is not of a few days or weeks or months but of 382 days. Therefore, there is no ground for condonation of delay.

(3.) There is another application being C.M. No. 46613/2018 for condonation of delay in re-filing of 277 days. In this application, though the condonation of delay is sought by pleading that the advocates for the appellants/defendants were negligent in not removing the objections raised by the Registry and that the appellants/defendants have made a complaint against the advocates, however in my opinion, the grounds given in this application for condonation of delay in re-filing are also false and frivolous and are rejected because nothing is shown or pleaded by the appellants/defendants as to how they remained in touch with their counsels for getting the objections removed, and therefore in my opinion, the complaint made to Bar Council is a self-serving complaint only to seek condonation of delay. Therefore, both the applications for condonation of delay in filing and re-filing being C.M. Nos. 46612/2018 and 46613/2018 have no merit and are liable to be dismissed. However, I have also heard the counsel for the appellants/defendants on merits and therefore the appeal is also being disposed off on merits.