R.S.A. No. 2567 of 2007 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 2567 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.03.2009 Daljit Singh ....appellant versus Romel Singh and others ....respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: - Mr. Munish Jolly, Advocate, for the appellant. *** VINOD K. SHARMA, J. It may be noticed that this appeal is accompanied by an application for condoning the delay of 220 days in refiling the appeal. The only reason given for condoning the delay reads as under: "That the accompanying appeal had been filed by the appellant well within limitation. That appeal was returned by the registry with certain objections and when that appeal was refiled it was advised by the counsel for the appeallant that though we had challenged the judgment, which is consolidated one, yet we have to file another appeal so that no technical objection be raised against filing of that appeal." The ground taken for condonation of delay cannot be said to be sufficient ground for condoning the delay of 220 days, especially when the appellant is a practising advocate. R.S.A. No. 2567 of 2007 (O&M) -2- Consequently, the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is dismissed. For the reasons, recorded in the order of even date passed in R.S.A. No. 2564 of 2007 titled Daljit Singh Vs. Romel Singh and others, this appeal is dismissed on merits as well as time barred. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge March 25, 2009 R.S.