LAWS(P&H)-2011-5-353

KEWAL SAWROOP Vs. SUBHASH CHANDER @ SUBHASH RANA

Decided On May 27, 2011
Kewal Sawroop Appellant
V/S
Subhash Chander @ Subhash Rana Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition was dismissed for non -prosecution on 29.10.2009. No one had appeared for the Petitioner before the Court to make submissions on the said date and thereafter, the order dismissing the revision petition in default was passed. Now Civil Misc. No. 10605 -CII of 2011 has been filed to seek recall of the said order after 451 days of delay. Civil Misc. No. 10604 -CII of 2011 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is also filed seeking condonation of this long delay. Except for stating that delay in filing the accompanying application is neither intentional nor deliberate and rather is caused due to the circumstances beyond the control of applicant -Appellant, no reason is given in the application to explain CIVIL MISC.N Os.10604 -05 -CII of 2011 in -2 -CIVIL REVISION No. 3961 of 2008 this inordinate delay.

(2.) AS per the settled position of law, each day is required to be explained. There are, thus, no reason what to talk of any sufficient reason to condone this delay. I am, thus, not inclined to condone the delay and recall order dated 29.10.2009 and the applications are, accordingly, dismissed.

(3.) THE Respondent is a Non Resident Indian, who had filed an application under Section 13 -B of East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. The Petitioner had appeared and sought leave to defend the petition, which was declined. The only ground that counsel for the Petitioner would urge is that the Respondent -landlord had sold various commercial properties and hence, it would show that his need is not bona fide. Though this submission is made and is pleaded as well, but there is no material placed on record to show that the Respondent -landlord had resorted to any sale of any property. Rather counsel for the Respondent has submitted that he had never sold any property and for this reason only the case had initially been adjourned to enable the counsel for the Petitioner to place on record the material. Thereafter, the counsel had chosen not to appear.