IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. FAO No.536 of 2006 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.08.2006 Sat Pal and others. ... Appellants Versus Surinder Kumar and others. ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND Present : None. UMA NATH SINGH, J.(ORAL) No one is present in the second round after pass over. Filing of the FAO is barred by 155 days' delay. The explanation given for delay in para no.2 of the application, on reproduction, reads as under:- “That the appellants doesn't know the technicalities of law and the clerk of the counsel before the Ld. MACT did not tell them about the limitation period of 90 days in filing the appeal. Appellants are also unknown about the maintainability of appeal against the MACT Award before this Hon'ble Court. In the month of November relatives of the appellants visited them and asked about the award and appeal, if they have filed any, then the appellants approached the undersigned counsel on 1.12.2005 FAO No. 536 of 2006 (O&M) 2 and undersigned counsel without further delay filing the same.” We do not find sufficient cause for condonation of delay and that apart, as per ratio of a judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court reported in AIR 1998 SC 2276 (P.K. Ramachandran versus State of Kerala and another), we cannot extend the limitation on equitable ground. Hence, this FAO is dismissed on the ground of delay. ( UMA NATH SINGH ) JUDGE August 04, 2006 ( S.D. ANAND ) vkd JUDGE