IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.3369 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.9.2011 Jasvir Singh and others ......Appellant(s) Versus State of Haryana and others ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Harpinder Singh, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Punchhi, Advocate for the appellant(s). Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral) The landowners have filed the instant appeal challenging the award of the Reference Court on the ground of inadequacy of compensation for their acquired land. This appeal has been filed after a delay of 779 days of expiry of limitation period. Along with this appeal, an application has been filed for condoning the said delay. The relevant paragraph of the application reads thus: “That there is delay of 779 days in filing appeal which has occurred due to the fact that the appellant after taking the brief from his counsel had entrusted the brief to one Ramesh Kumar who was a clerk in the District Courts at Sirsa for going to Chandigarh and engage a counsel for filing the appeal in the Hon'ble High Court. Now after coming to know from the other land owners that the case are being listed for hearing when the appellants came to the District Courts to know about the fate they came to know that the clerk has already left the Courts and his whereabouts are not known. The appellants thereafter immediately applied for an other copy and engaged an other counsel for enquiring about the filing of the appeal who told that the file was not filed nor any X-objections could be filed as the State has RFA No.3369 of 2011 (O&M) -2- also not filed any appeal. The appellants have thereafter engaged an other counsel and are filing the present appeal. The delay in filing the appeal has occurred due to paucity of funds as the only land with the appellants had been acquired and the appellants were without any job/work. The delay has occurred due to unavoidable circumstances which were beyond his control.” This Court has not accepted such an explanation in many of the appeals decided by this Court for condoning such a huge delay. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants have brought to the notice of this Court that even on merits, this appeal is covered by a judgment of this Court passed in RFA No. No.276 of 2009 (Mohinder Singh and others v. State of Haryana and others) decided on 3.2.2011), and according to the aforesaid judgment, this appeal filed on behalf of the claimants, is liable to be dismissed. Thus, this appeal is dismissed on the ground of limitation as well as on merits. September 27, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE