nothing but abuse of process of Court. Not only the effort by the appellant to seek setting aside the ex-parte judgment in the O.A. was rejected, but appeal against this order was also dismissed. How can the appellant be heard in this appeal which is nothing but a second appeal? In any case, this appeal is filed with inordinate delay. If anything can be said about the conduct of the appellant is that he has filed the Appeal/Inward No.162/2015 which is an abuse of the process of the Court. It is to mislead this Tribunal that this appeal is filed to impugn the order which otherwise has attained finality. The M.A. 35/2007 filed by the appellant was dismsised on 18.1.2010. The appeal filed against this order was then dismissed by this Tribunal on 22.11.2010. Both the orders are detailed orders passed after considering the challenge raised against the order passed in O.A. on merits. If the appellant had any intention to challenge the order in the O.A. on any other ground, then he ought to have raised those grounds in the said M.A. or in appeal before this Tribunal. Having not done so, the appellant even cannot justify the delay in filing the appeal against the order passed in O.A. The appellant had the knowledge of this order when it was passed in the year 2007. He cannot be heard now at this stage to seek condonation of this delay.”
