RFA No.5351 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.5351 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 18.7.2011 Chander Bhan etc. ...Applicant-appellants. vs Land Acquisition Collector,Gurgaon etc. ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Pavan Malik, Advocate, for the applicant-appellants. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J. C.M.No.13403-CI of 2010. This is the claimants appeal challenging the award dated 30.11.2002 on the ground that market value of the land as determined by the Reference Court is inadequate with a prayer for enhancement. This appeal has been filed after a delay of 2718 days. Along with this appeal, an application for condonation of delay has also been filed with a prayer to condone the said delay, alleging that the appellants were wrongly advised by their counsel. The relevant paras of the application reads as follows:- “2.That the counsel of the appellants in the reference court had advised that in case the compensation is enhanced by this hon'ble court or by hon'ble supreme court, then in view of section 28-A of the Land acquisition Act, the appellants will also be entitled to and will also get the enhanced compensation. 3. That going by the advice of the counsel, the appellants did not file the present appeal but now as the appellants have RFA No.5351 of 2010 (O&M) 2 come to know that various other persons had filed the appeal and only those persons got the enhanced compensation who had preferred the appeal. 4. That after obtaining the certified copy, the appellants arranged for the funds for filing the present appeal before this hon'ble court and thereafter engaged the counsel for filing the appeal and after the preparation of the appeal by the counsel, the same is being filed in this hon'ble court without further waste of time. 5. That during the process, a delay of 2718 days has occurred which is not intentional but for the aforesaid reason.” It is well settled that ignorance of law is no ground to condone the delay. Not only this, the averments made in the application for condonation of delay are not supported by any corroborative evidence. It has been noticed by this Court that, now a days, it has become a routine to blame the counsel of the lower Courts and to plead that for the negligence of the counsel the litigant should not suffer. Generally, except an averment there is no material on record to sustain such allegation against the lower court lawyer. Even in this case, appellant could not show/place on record any evidence to support such averments. Admittedly, appellants have not taken any legal/disciplinary action against the alleged wrong advice given to them. Admittedly, the connected matters have been finally decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court and thereafter the present appeal has been filed. In this view of the matter, there is no sufficient ground to condone such a long delay in filing the appeal. The prayer for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is rejected. RFA No.5351 of 2010 (O&M) 3 RFA No.5351 of 2010 Since the application for condonation of delay in filing this appeal has been rejected, this appeal is also dismissed being hopelessly time barred. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge July 18, 2011 rk