PAWAN KUMAR & ORS Vs. BHINDU & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By medium of this application, the applicant has sought condonation of five years and six months delay that has crept up in filing of the appeal.

(2.) It was averred that the applicants / appellants had engaged one Devinder Singh, Advocate, for filing the appeal before the learned first Appellate Court and the same stood filed on 26.05.2011 and it was decided on 23.11.2012 but the Advocate Devinder Singh constantly informed the applicants/appellants that the appeal is still pending adjudication before the learned first Appellate Court. It is only in Jan., 2017, when appellant No. 1 Pawan Kumar went to the Court, then it transpired that the appeal had already been dismissed way back on 23.11.2012. The appellants applied for the certified copy of the judgment on 05.01.2017 and got the same on the same day. Thereafter, he contacted the Counsel at Shimla for filing the appeal but the Counsel advised him to come in the last week of Feb., 2017 as the High Court was closed for winter vacation. Accordingly, the appellant came to Shimla in first week of March, 2017 and immediately thereafter has filed the instant appeal.

(3.) Respondent No. 1 has contested the application by filing reply wherein preliminary objection regarding there being no plausible reason has set out for condoning the delay. On merits, it was averred that since the applicants have failed to explain the delay of each day and has further failed to show the time and day when he contacted his Counsel, the application for condonation of delay is liable to be dismissed.