IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 625 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 15, 2009 Vishwa Pal Singh …Appellant Versus Haryana State and another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. This appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent challenges order dated 6.7.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge in RFA No. 3444 of 1998 [main judgment passed in RFA No. 1206 of 1996 (Manohar Lal and others v. State of Haryana and another) decided on 6.7.2000]. In view of amendment in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, by way of incorporation of Section 100A, no intra-court appeal from the date of said amendment, would be maintainable. The provision of Section 100A CPC has been interpreted by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Parshotam Dass v. State of Haryana, 2003 (2) PLR 816 (F.B.). Even otherwise, there is one day delay in filing the appeal and huge delay of 8 years and 190 days in re-filing the instant appeal. The appeal is not maintainable. Dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (JASWANT SINGH) October 15, 2009 JUDGE Pkapoor