RFA No.5292 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. C.M.A.No.13305 of 2010 in RFA No.5292 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 7.9.2011 Bhim Singh and another ...Petitioners vs The State of Haryana etc. ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.R.A.Yadav, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr.Rajesh Garg, Addl.A.G.Haryana for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral) This is claimants appeal challenging the impugned award of the Reference Court on the ground that compensation awarded is on the lower side. There is a delay of 183 days in filing this appeal. Along with this appeal, an application for condonation of delay has been filed. The averments made in this application reads as follows:- “ That the accompanying RFA is being filed in this Hon'ble Court along with this application. That the reference petition was filed, by the applicant/appellants and the same was decided on 28.8.2009 by the Ld.Addl.District Judge Gurgaon and copy thereof was applied on 4.9.2009 and prepared on 7.10.2009. The applicants/appellants are old aged persons and they executed the Special Power of Attorney on 27.10.2009 in favour of Sheoraj s/o Sis Ram resident of village Fazilpur Jharsa, Tehsil and Distt.Gurgaon, and due to their old age and ill-health could not instruct their Special Power of Attorney to file an appeal in this Hon'ble High Court within 90 days from the date of decision and therefore, the delay of 183 days occurred due RFA No.5292 of 2010 (O&M) 2 to the reasons explained above which are beyond the control of the applicants/appellants. That as the acquisition is compulsory in nature against the wishes of the applicants/appellants and the applicants/appellants are inadequately compensated. That the delay of 183 days in filing the appeal is due to the reasons as explained above in this application which is unintentional and beyond the control of the appellant. That against the judgment and award of Ld.Addl.District Judge, the co-villagers filed Regular First Appeals in this Hon'ble High Court and are admitted and are pending adjudication in this Hon'ble Court, arising out of the same award of the Additional District Judge,Gurgaon dated 28.08.2009 arising out of the same acquisition. It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the delay of 183 days in filing the appeal may kindly be condoned, in the interest of justice”. The prayer of the applicants for condonation of delay has been contested by the respondents stating that the appellants have made a concocted story only to cover the undue delay of 183 days and no sufficient grounds to condone the delay have been shown. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the averments made in the application which are supported by an affidavit of one Sheoraj son of Sis Ram who is special power of attorney of the appellants. The plea taken by the appellants is that after the decision of the Reference Court on 28.8.2009, they could not file the appeal within 90 days as they are old persons and they executed the Special Power of Attorney on 27.10.,2009 in favour of Sheoraj to do the following acts on their behalf:- “1. To act appear in the above noted cases in the concerned RFA No.5292 of 2010 (O&M) 3 Court/competent Authority, or in any other Court in which the same may be tried or heard and also in the appellate Courts. 2. To file, sign, verify pleadings, replications, appeals, cross objections or petitions for executions, review, revision, withdrawal, compromises or other petitions replies, objection or affidavits or other documents as may be deemed necessary or proper for the prosecution of the said cases at all stages. 3. To file and take back documents. 4. To withdraw or compromise the said case or submit to arbitration any difference or disputes that may arise touching or in any manner relating to the said cases. 5. To take out execution proceedings. 6. To deposit, draw and receive money. Cheques and grant receipts thereof and to do all other acts and thing which may be necessary to be done for the progress and in course of prosecution of the said cases. 7. To do all acts incidental to and collateral with the above purpose. 8. We further authorize the above said SPA to receive the amount of compensation in the above said LAC case and to furnish security or receipt as required by the Hon'ble Courts order in this particular cases. And We hereby agree to ratify all acts or assurances done or executed or made by the said attorney pursuant to the power hereby conferred in him as if the same were done or made by us personally” Once that is so, the averments made in the application cannot be accepted. In the affidavit, the Special Power of Attorney Sheoraj is not specifically stating that he was ignorant about law of limitation. Even otherwise ignorance of law is no ground to condone the delay. Since false plea has been taken in the application and sufficient grounds are not shown, the prayer made in the application is rejected. RFA No.5292 of 2010 (O&M) 4 Merely because other appeals are pending, delay cannot be condoned on the basis of false plea. Consequently, appeal is also dismissed being time barred. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge September 7, 2011 rk