LPA No.672 of 1997 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. LPA No.672 of 1997 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.02.2010 State of Punjab and others ....Appellants. Versus Amir Chand ....Respondent. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh Present: Mr. Jaswinder Singh, DAG, Punjab for the appellants ... Alok Singh, J. 1. Present appeal has been preferred by the State against the order dated 22.7.1997 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby RFA No.1148 of 1996 was dismissed being barred by limitation. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the State had challenged the award rendered by the Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur dated 13.11.1991 by filing RFA No.1148 of 1996. The aforesaid appeal was filed 1472 days beyond the period prescribed for filing the same. Learned Single Judge dismissed the appeal on account of delay in filing the same because no justifiable explanation could be given by the appellant for the inordinate delay of 1472 days caused in filing the appeal. 3. Learned Single Judge while dismissing the appeal vide order dated 22.7.1997, observed as under:- LPA No.672 of 1997 2 “The present appeal has been filed with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, on 25.4.1996. No justification has been given for sitting over the matter even after the court fee had been supplied to the Advocate General, Punjab or even when a decision has been given on the review application. In absence of any justifiable explanation, I have no option but to decline the prayer of the appellant for condonation of inordinate delay in filing the appeal. Consequently, the application shall stand dismissed. Resultantly, the appeal too shall stand dismissed being barred by time.” 4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants has reiterated the same explanation which was tendered before learned Single Judge for the delay caused in filing the appeal. He could not point out any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by learned Single Judge. 6. In view of the above, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by learned Single Judge. The appeal is, accordingly, Dismissed. ( Alok Singh ) Judge ( Adarsh Kumar Goel ) Judge 09.02.2010 sk.