This single-paragraph oral order dismissed the application for condonation of a 766-day delay in filing an appeal, rejecting the plea of counsel's wrong advice as invalid. Consequently, the leave to appeal and the petition were also dismissed.
Application for condonation of delay dismissed; Leave to appeal dismissed; Petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
CRMA No.35-MA of2009 (O&M) Decided on:- 22.07.2009
Gopi Ram ……Appellant
Versus
Balwan and others …….Respondents
Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. C. Puri
Present Mr. s. S. Walia, Advocate for the appellant.
K. C. Puri, J.(Oral )
From the perusal of file it is revealed that process fee has not been filed for issuing notice to the respondent on the last two consecutive dates.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
There is delay of 766 days in filing the appeal. The only ground taken in the application for condonation of delay is that due to wrong advise of the counsel, appeal could not be filed. That is not a valid ground.
So, in these circumstances, application for condonation of delay in filing the leave to appeal stands dismissed.
Consequently, the petition also stands dismissed.
July 22, 2009 ( K.C. Puri ) mamta Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, based on wrong advice of counsel, is valid.
Whether the leave to appeal and the petition should be allowed given the dismissal of the condonation application.
Gopi Ram
Balwan and others
K. C. Puri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
