1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CAZ No.6/2009 in LPA St. No.18065/2006 in WP No.4463/2003 (D) [Kamal wd/o Shantaram Dhole .vrs. Additional Commissioner, Nagpur and others] ............................................................................................................................................................................................. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................................... Coram : A.P. Lavande & P.D. Kode, JJ. Dated : 5 th March, 2009. 1. Heard Mr. P.N. Kendurkar, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. K.S. Joshi, learned AGP for respondent no.1 and Mr. V.V. Bhangde, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3. 2. By this application the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 2 years and 324 days in filing the present letters patent appeal against order dated 2.12.2003 passed in Writ Petition No.4463/2003. 3. It is the case of the applicant that she came to know about order dated 2.12.2003 passed by the learned Single Judge only on 2 12.9.2006 when the possession of the suit premises was taken by respondent nos.2 and 3 although the impugned order was passed on 2.12.2003. The reply has been filed on record by respondent nos.2 and 3 opposing the application. Along with the reply filed by respondent nos.2 and 3, the copy of the plaint in Regular Civil Suit No.27/2006 filed by respondent nos.2 and 3 against the applicant seeking recovery of arrears of rent has been filed. The copy of the written statement filed by the applicant is also filed and in the said written statement in reply para no.5 of the plaint pertaining to the dismissal of the writ petition, the applicant has stated thus : “The contents regarding dismissal of the writ petition is a matter of record and, therefore, needless to be contravened”. The said written statement was filed on 7.9.2006. Therefore, according to Mr. Bhangde, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3, the applicant was very much aware about the impugned order prior to 7.9.2006. Learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3, therefore, submitted that the statement made by the applicant on oath that the applicant got the knowledge of the impugned order only on 12.9.2006 is an incorrect statement. 3 4. Placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported at 2008 (13) Scale, 773 – Pundlik Jalam Patil (D) by Lrs. .vrs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project and another, Mr. Bhangde submitted that the very fact that a person claiming condonation of delay makes an incorrect statement is sufficient to dismiss the application without going into merits as to whether sufficient cause has been made out. 5. Per contra, Mr. Kendurkar, learned counsel for the applicant, states that the statement made by the applicant in para 5 of the written statement is a general statement and it cannot be saw that the applicant had knowledge about the impugned order prior to 12.9.2006. 6. Having perused the record and having considered the submissions made the learned counsel for the parties, we find no ground to entertain the application. The party seeking condonation of delay must come out with clean hands. If the party makes incorrect statement in the application seeking condonation of delay 4 that by itself is sufficient to dismiss the application as has been held by the Apex Court in the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil .vrs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project and another (Supra). 7. Perusal of the written statement filed by the applicant in the suit filed by respondent nos.2 and 3 clearly establishes that the applicant had knowledge about the impugned order much prior to 7.9.2006. Therefore, the only conclusion is that the applicant has made incorrect statement and on this ground itself, the application is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE Gulande