The court reinforced that delay in filing appeals must be justified with sufficient cause, emphasizing that the statute of limitations should be strictly adhered to despite personal hardships.

Bipin Chander Nergi, Judge (oral).

The present application has been filed seeking condonation of doelay in filing the present appeal against the impugned judgment passed by the Courts below.

2. The appeal in the case at hand was decided by the First Aphpellate Court on 22.11.2019. Admittedly, the Regular Second Appeal, in the case at hand, has been filed before this Hon’ble Court on 20.09.2022, after a delay of 2 years 9 months and 16 Hdays.

3. In the application, it has been submitted that the copy of the judgment passed by the learned First Appellate Court was received on 06.01.2020. Thereafter, a counsel had been engaged in the High Court. It has been averred that counsel in the High Court was met by the applicant in January 2020 and on account of ensuing winter vacation, he had advised the applicant to come to Shimla in the first week of March 2020.

4. When the applicant visited Shimla in March 2020, he was informed that counsel engaged is not well and iPs not coming to his chambers or Court. Subsequent thereto, on account of Covid Pandemic, restrictions were imposed. It is averred in the application that the applicant was informed qua enhancement of limitation on account of the Covid Pandemic. The death of the counsel who had been engaged in January 2020 had taken place on 17.03.2021. As per the case set up in the application, it is in month of July 2022 that the applicant- initiated steps for tracing his file in the office of the counsel, who had been previously engaged and subsequently died. The record of the appeal is stated to have been traced out in August 2022 and it is thereafter, that the appeal, in the case at hand was filed.

5. In reply filed by the respondent, it has been categorically averred that in pursuance to the judgment dated 22.11.2019, passed by the First Appellate Court, since, the same had not been assailed by way of Regular Second Appeal, an execution petition had been initiated. In the execution petition, which had been initiated the present applicant had been participating. In the execution proceedings, the applicant had been served for 27.11.2021, but he had not appeared on the said date. Subsequent thereto, an attachment order was passed and the same were executed on 06.01.2022, as per the report of SDO(C) Palampur, District Kangra. It is thereafter that the applicant had put in appearance on 30.03.2022 and had moved an application for setting aside the ex parte orPder in the execution proceedings and the same was allowed on 21.04.2022.

6. Thereafter, the execution was listed on 22.06.2022, 23.08.2022 and on 16.09.2022. Last opportunity to file objections were granted to the applicant on 16.09.2022, failing which, opportunity deemed to have been closed on 20.09.2022. The execution proceedings were listed for consideration on 30.09.2022, 11.11.2022 and 05.12.2022 for filing list of properties. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 20.01.2023 and 11.04.2023 before the Executing Court.

7. Post-completion of pleadings in the application filed seeking condonation of delay, in filing the present appeal against the impugned judgment dated 22.11.2019, passed by the First Appellate Court issues were framed on 26.09.2023.

The same read as follows:-

1. Whether there is sufficient reason for condonation of delay? OPA.

2. Whether the application is not maintainable? OPR.

3. Whether the applicant has concealed material facts from the Court, if so, to what effect? OPR.

8. In order to support the contention made in the application, two witnesses have been examined by the applicant, the applicant has appeared in person as AW-1 and one Sh. Sunil Kumar, Advocate, working