SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 35173

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
BALKAR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
HARMESH SINGH AND OTHERS – Respondent


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

223 RSA-2106-2023(O&M)

Date of decision: 27.03.2026 Balkar Singh ...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Harmesh Singh & Others ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Harkaran Singh, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel)

for the appellant.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J. CM-7120-C-2023 This is an application under Section 151 of CPC for condonation of delay of 757 days in re-filing the appeal.

The reason for condonation of such inordinate delay in filing the present appeal is that:-

“… … …registry again raised objection on 22.06.2022 and thereafter, the undersigned counsel change his office for whitewash, during that period the brief of the present case are mis-placed, yesterday it was found from the decided cases and today is being filed without any further delay, so the delay has occurred.”

The above-said explanation given by the applicant/appellant is cryptic and does not constitute sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay of 757 days in re-filing the appeal. No Details are given and no material is furnished to show as to on what date the learned Counsel had changed his office. In recent judgment of “Shivamma (Dead) by LRs Vs. Karnataka

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top