State of Haryana vs Suresh Kumar

Mehtab S. Gill, J.—State has filed an application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 527 days in filing the appeal.

In the application for condonation of delay, it has been stated that the District Attorney, Ambala referred the matter to the Legal Remembrancer and Secretary to Government, Haryana (hereinafter to be referred as LR) on 30.10.2001. The LR opined on 21.12.2001 that it is a fit case where an appeal can be filed. The office of Executive Engineer, Provincial Division, PWD (BYR) Branch, received the recommendation on 8.1.2002.

It has been further averred in the application that the LR did not send certified copy of judgment. Photo copy of judgment was collected at personal level from the Additional District Judge, Ambala on 1.12.2001. Limitation for filing the appeal expired on 29.8.2000.

Counsel for the appellant has stated that the delay was not intentional and it should be condoned.

Learned counsel for the respondent has stated that nothing has been stated in the application to this effect. No evidence has come forward. No affidavit has been filed by LR or the Executive Engineer to this effect that the delay has not intentional.

I have gone through CM Application for condonation of delay and the reply filed by the respondent.

There is no affidavit filed to substantiate the averments made in the application for condonation of delay. Delay has been caused by the appellant intentionally and in a careless manner.

Counsel for the respondent has drawn my attention to P.K. Ramachandran Vs. State of Kerala and Another, wherein the Supreme Court has held that the Courts have no power to extend limitation on equitable grounds.

The case cited above squarely covers the case of the respondent. Application for condonation of delay is dismissed.

In the result, the appeal is also dismissed.