: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2233 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO.2233 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO.2233 OF 2005 Shri Daulatram Paramanand Narang ...Petitioner. V/s. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(2), Ahmednagar & Anr. ...Respondents. Mr.Narayan Sahu i/b S.K.Srivastav & Co. for the Petitioner. None for the Respondent. CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATE : 27th June, 2005. DATE : 27th June, 2005. DATE : 27th June, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner. By this Petition, the Petitioner has impugned the order dated 9th August, 2002. The present petition has been opposed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The present petition has been lodged on 30th March, 2005. 2. The only explanation with regard to the delay in filing the above petition is found in para 20 of the petition which reads as under: "(20) That the Petitioner was not keeping good health and was suffering from heart disease and was admitted in hospital on several : 2 : occasions and hence could not approach this Hon’ble Court earlier. There is no deliberate delay in approaching this Hon’ble Court and the Petitioner is thus approaching this Hon’ble Court as early as possible. The Petitioner relies upon the medical treatment papers when produced." 3. On perusal of the above, it clearly indicates that the Petitioner has not given any details, whatsover. The entire submission is totally vague. Petition suffers from gross delay. Hence, the above Petition stands dismissed on the ground of laches. (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.)