C.R. No. 19 of 2010. 20.05.2011. Present: Mr. R.K.Gautam,Senior Advocate with Mr. Vikrant Chandel, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.B.C.Verma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. CMP(M) No.121 of 2010. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the revision against order dated 12.03.2008. It has been stated that the applicants had earlier filed an appeal against the order dated 12.03.2008 which was dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Kangra on 14.07.2009 and thereafter the present revision has been filed. It has been stated in the application that the Counsel for the applicants could not contact the applicants in view of change of telephone numbers, only on 28.11.2009 the applicant No.2 had gone to Dharamsala in connection with his personal work where he met his Counsel and then came to know about the decision. The applicants thereafter collected the brief and filed the petition. 2. The application has been opposed on the ground that no sufficient cause has been shown by the applicants for condonation of delay. The application is not bonafide. The order dated 12.03.2008 was assailed in appeal by the petitioners before learned Additional District Judge, Kangra, who decided the appeal on 14.07.2009. The copy of the judgment dated 14.07.2009 was delivered on 21.07.2009. The applicants in the application have stated that on 29.10.2009, B.S.N.L. had installed new telephone, but numbers stand changed. The copy of judgment dated 14.07.2009 was delivered on 21.07.2009. The change in telephone numbers, if any, took place after 29.10.2009. There is no explanation what happened in between 21.07.2009 to 29.10.2009. On merits also the objections of the applicants are that the shares have been wrongly calculated. The learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) has observed that executing Court cannot go behind the decree. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicant No.1 is 75 years old and, therefore, the revision could not be filed earlier. The application for condonation of delay has been filed on the affidavit of applicant No.2 Chuni Lal and not on the affidavit of applicant No.1 Chandu. Similarly, the revision is also supported by an affidavit of Chuni Lal. The applicants have not shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay from 14.07.2009 onwards. The application is not bonafide. The revision was actually filed on 11th December, 2009. Resultantly, there is no merit in the application which is dismissed. The revision petition is also disposed of accordingly. (Kuldip Singh), Judge. May 20, 2011. (krt)