BALJEET SINGH BRAR Vs. M/S. BIRLA SUN LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD., THOUGH ITS MANAGER AND M/S. BIRLA SUN LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE is delay of 99 days in filing this revision petition. The delay has been explained in the application filed by him, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and Section 151 of CPC for condonation of delay. The delay has been explained in para. Nos. 2 & 3 of the application, as under: -

(2.) THAT the main file was misplaced in the office of the counsel by the clerk of the counsel hence the same could not be filed in time. That now on 30.07.2013, the main file has fortunately been traced out in the office by the clerk of the counsel, which was inadvertently placed in another file of some other case titled, 'Jai Kishan Vs. Amit', pending in the court of Sh. Sunil Chaudhary, C.J., Delhi. The petitioner has sufficient cause for condonation of delay and will suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in terms of money in case the delay is not condoned.

(3.) ALL these arguments have left no impression upon us. About three years' have elapsed when the First Appeal was filed. The petitioner should have appeared before the State Commission on 25.07.2012 and 10.12.2012 and made a prayer to the State Commission to hear the arguments. It is also clear that, on 04.01.2013, when the case was dismissed in default, nobody appeared. No explanation for the same is forthcoming. The Court has not to function in accordance with the whims and fancies of the litigant(s). When the case was dismissed in default, warning bells should have rung, but the petitioner, after receipt of the copy of the order on 25.01.2013, filed this revision petition on 02.08.2013. For a period of more than six months, the counsel could not trace the file. This is a frivolous story. Even if the file was lost, the counsel should have got prepared another file, which, in emergent period, can be prepared in a day, or two.