CM No.5129-32-C of 2011 1 in RSA No.3313 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:13.05.2011 Pushpinder Singh ....appellant Versus Hakim Singh & Ors. .....respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Harsh Bunger, Advocate for the applicant-appellant *** RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.(ORAL): The appellant had filed the instant appeal in July 2007. It remained pending for motion hearing and was dismissed for non- prosecution vide order dated 25th September, 2008. The order dated 25th September, 2008 was recalled vide order dated 28.11.2008 passed in Civil Misc.application No.11290-C of 2008 and the appeal was ordered to be listed for arguments on 26.02.2009. The case was further adjourned. On 30.05.2009, since no one appeared on behalf of the appellant, the appeal was again dismissed in default. Vide Civil Misc.application No.5131-C of 2011, a prayer has been made to recall the aforesaid order and for listing this appeal for hearing. Along with this application, Civil Misc.application No.5129-C of 2011 has also been placed on record, praying therein to condone the delay CM No.5129-32-C of 2011 2 in RSA No.3313 of 2007 of 686 days in filing the aforesaid application for restoration. A perusal of the averments made in this application shows that appellant was in the knowledge of the order dated 30.05.2009 passed by this Court. However, he took it causally to file the instant application, as according to him, the matter stood compromised between the parties vide compromise dated 20.11.2009. In view of the aforesaid fact alone, that the order dated 30.05.2009 was in the knowledge of the appellant and he kept quiet because of the reasons that there was a compromise between the parties, I find no reason to condone the delay in filing the restoration application. Civil Misc.application for condonation of delay stands dismissed. Consequently, the application for restoration of the appeal is also dismissed. Civil Misc.applications No.5130 and 5132-C of 2011 also do not survive in view of the dismissal of the applications. (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE 13.05.2011 neenu