IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No. 13431-C of 2010 in/and R.S.A. No. 4504 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: November 29, 2011 Pawan Kumar .. Appellant Vs. State of Haryana and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Ms. Seema Pasricha, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Kartar Singh, DAG, Haryana for the respondent-State. A.N. Jindal, J Pawan Kumar Constable No.148, Karnal had sought a declaration against the defendants to the effect that the orders dated 31.7.2002 passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Karnal, dated 8.11.2002 passed by the Inspector General of Police, Rohtak and dated 12.3.2003 passed by the Deputy General of Police, Haryana awarding punishment of stopping of six annual increments with cumulative effect, but he was denied the relief by the trial court on 16.4.2008. The appeal against which was also dismissed on 24.4.2009. The appeal being delayed by 398 days is accompanied by an application for condonation of delay. The appellant has sought condonation of 398 days' delay on the ground that there was a matrimonial dispute between him and his wife, therefore, he was under mental stress. His wife had filed one complaint against him in July/August, 2009 and again another complaint and thereafter ultimately a compromise was effected between them on 11.10.2009. As such, he filed this appeal on 25.8.2010. From the bare allegations, it appears that the appellant appears to be quite negligent in filing the appeal. If he could pursue the case filed against him by his wife, then what was the difficulty for him to pursue the present case. Even after compromise between him and his wife which was effected on 11.10.2009, the appeal was filed almost one year thereafter. As R.S.A. No. 4504 of 2010 (O&M) -2- *** such, there are no sufficient grounds to condone the delay. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed. Resultantly, the accompanying appeal also fails. November 29, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge