UPENDRA KUMAR DEBNATH Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By making this application, the applicant, who is the appellant in RSA No. 17/2003, has sought for condonation of delay of 215 days in preferring the second appeal aforementioned.

(2.) For seeking condonation of delay, the case of the application is, briefly stated, thus : After the impugned judgment and order, dated 30.3.2002, was passed, in Title Appeal No. 14/2001, the applicant- appellant applied for certified copy, on 11.4.2002, for the purpose of filing second appeal. The certified copy was delivered to the applicant on 18.5.2002, whereupon the applicant handed over file of the entire case to his counsel, Sri Suohasis Talapatra, on 12.7.2002, for preparing the second appeal, but on 13.7.2002, the chamber of the applicant's counsel was shifted from Harish Thakur Road, Krishnanagar, Agartala to Kunjaban Road, Agartala, and in the process of shifting, two files, one of the present applicant and the other of one Sri Bijoy Kumar Das (applicant in CM Appln. No. 26/2003) were lost. The files could be traced out by the counsel only on 22.4.2003 and on being informed by the counsel, the applicant, immediately, came to his counsel and the appeal was accordingly filed with prayer for condonation of delay on 26.4.2003. There was, according to the applicant, no laches on his part and the appeal could not be filed in time for reasons beyond his control.

(3.) The respondents have resisted the prayer for condonation of delay by filing their objection, wherein it has been submitted, inter alia, that there is no substantial question of law involved in the impugned judgment and order enabling the applicant to prefer second appeal and that the delay has not been convincingly explained.