1 +D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL(W)NO.551/2006 M/s. Ganganagar Timber Mart Vs. State & Ors. Date of Order :: 24-01-2007 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI S.N.JHA HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Shri K.S. Yadav, for the appellant. The writ petition giving rise to this special appeal was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on the ground that the order impugned was appellable and the petitioner had not availed the remedy of appeal. Refusal to entertain writ petition on the ground of availability of alternative remedy is a valid ground, and we therefore find no error in the order of the learned Single Judge. Counsel submitted that before filing the appeal, the appellant is required to deposit 20% of the amount which would be onerous. We find no substance in the submission. Right of appeal is a creature of statute which can be circumscribed by conditions. If the statute has made it obligatory to deposit part of the amount as a condition precedent to maintainability of the appeal, the same cannot be challenged as being onerous. 2 Counsel attempted to find fault with the impugned order. We are of the view that the fault, if any, can be looked into and rectified by the appellate authority. Counsel then submitted that the proposed appeal has become barred by limitation and appropriate order may be passed condoning the delay. Condonation of delay involves exercise of discretion by the concerned authority and this Court cannot pass any order to that effect. It is open to the appellant to satisfy the appellate authority that he had taken recourse to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under bona fide legal advice, by invoking the provisions of Section 14 read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act. With these observations, the appeal is dismissed. [GOVIND MATHUR],J. [S.N.JHA],CJ. Praveen