CM Nos.5897-99-C1 of 2010 ::1:: in/and RFA No.2270 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM Nos.5897-99-C1 of 2010 in/and RFA No.2270 of 2010 Date of decision: 22.07.2011 Smt. Kamlesh and others ..Appellants Versus State of Haryana and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG a). Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? b). To be referred to the Reporters or not ? c). Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present:- Mr.Vikas Kumar, Advocate for the applicants-appellants. RAKESH KUMAR GARG J. (ORAL) CM No.5898-CI of 2010 For the reasons mentioned in the application, same stands allowed and the delay of 122 days in re-filing this appeal is condoned. CM No.5899-CI of 2010 Allowed subject to just exceptions. CM No.5897-CI of 2010 in/and RFA No.2270 of 2010 Briefly stated appellants, who are the legal representatives of Hirdey Ram Yadav son of Bhura, the original land owner and who died on 29.07.1998 during the pendency of the reference application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984, have approached this Court to challenge the impugned award dated 05.04.2001 passed by the Additional District Judge, Faridabad on the ground that compensation awarded for the acquired land is on the lower side and they were entitled to enhancement CM Nos.5897-99-C1 of 2010 ::2:: in/and RFA No.2270 of 2010 of the compensation. This appeal is time barred and has been filed after a delay of 2875 days. Alongwith the appeal, an application for condonation of delay has also been filed. The averments made in this application reads thus:- "That the appellants are rustic persons and had handed over the papers of the case alongwith the counsel's fee to Sh. R.K. Bhatti, Advocate Faridabad for engaging an Advocate practicing in this Hon'ble Court for the purpose of filing the appeal before this Hon'ble Court. It was informed to the appellants by Sh. R.K. Bhatti, Advocate that he has handed over the papers to Sh. Vikas Jain, Advocate for filing the appeal. That the appellants were not aware at all regarding filing of the appeal. In the month of March, 2009 the appellants went to know the status of the case thereupon they came to know that Sh. Vikas Jain, Advocate has expired and no appeal has been filed against the impugned award. When the appellants confronted Sh. R.K. Bhatti, Advocate with this fact he failed to give satisfactory reply and dilly dallying the matter. That then the appellants applied for the certified copy of the impugned award and made great efforts to collect the papers of the case and thereafter by engaging the present counsel is filing the instant appeal. That the notification under section 4 was issued on 9.5.1995 for the land measuring 89.74 acres situated within the revenue estate of village Malerna Tehsil Ballabgarh District Faridabad for a public purpose namely for development and utilization of land as residential, commercial and industrial for Sector 62 Faridabad. The said notification came up for consideration before Sh. S.P.Singh Addl. District Judge Faridabad who has decided various references and awarded Rs.290 per Sq. yard." CM Nos.5897-99-C1 of 2010 ::3:: in/and RFA No.2270 of 2010 From the perusal of the aforesaid averments, it is crystal clear that the applicants/appellants have not pursued their appeal diligently. In spite of the fact that Hirdey Ram Yadav had died on 29.07.1998 and the impugned award was passed on 05.04.2011 and even in execution proceedings of the aforesaid award, they were brought on record as legal representatives of the aforesaid Hirdey Ram Yadav vide order dated 24.07.2002, they were negligent about pursuing the instant appeal. Although, according to them, they had handed over the documents alongwith fee to Sh. R.K. Bhatti, Advocate, Faridabad, for engaging an advocate practising in this Court for the purpose of filing this appeal and that Sh. R.K. Bhatti, informed them that he had engaged Sh. Vikas Jain, Advocate. These facts were never cross-checked by them. It is their own case that they were not aware at all about the filing of the appeal and they went to Sh. Vikas Jain, Advocate only in the year, 2009 when they came to know that no appeal has been filed on their behalf as Sh. Vikas Jain was not engaged by Sh. R.K. Bhatti, Advocate. There is nothing on record that the applicants have ever made any complaint against the conduct of Sh. R.K. Bhatti, Advocate either to the Police or the Bar Council or any other authority. In fact, there is not an iota of evidence on record to support the submissions made by the appellant/applicants. It is admitted fact that RFA No.2501 of 2001 arising out the impugned award has already been decided by this Court on 03.05.2006 determining the compensation finally. In this view of the matter, this plea taken by the appellants seems to be false and is not sufficient to condone the huge delay in filing this appeal. Consequently, prayer for condoning the delay of 2875 days in filing this appeal is rejected. CM Nos.5897-99-C1 of 2010 ::4:: in/and RFA No.2270 of 2010 Consequently, this appeal, which is hopelessly time barred is also dismissed. (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) July 22, 2011 JUDGE Sukhpreet