R. S. A. No. 527 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : R. S. A. No. 527 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision : February 05, 2010 Umar Mohd. .... Appellant Vs. Islam and another .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. I. K. Mehta, Senior Advocate with Mr. M. S. Kohli, Advocate for the applicant-appellant. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : C. M. No. 1490-C of 2010 : This is application by appellant Umar Mohd. under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short – CPC) for condonation of delay of 2686 days in re-filing the appeal. The appeal was originally filed on 25.09.2002, but was returned with some objections and thereafter, it was re-filed on 01.02.2010 i.e. after delay of more than 7 years and 4 months. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and perused the case file. Condonation of aforesaid long delay of more than 7 years and 4 months is sought on the grounds, as pleaded in paragraphs 4 to 10 of the application, which are reproduced hereunder :- “4. That the appellant is handicapped person, with serious disability and R. S. A. No. 527 of 2010 (O&M) 2 could not travel for a long distance. 5. That the respondent wanted to take forcible possession of the land from the appellant whereas the appellant resisted and for this very reason he was involved in a false criminal case wherein he has been sentenced to imprisonment for one year RI u/s 148 IPC and five years RI u/s 307 read with Section 149 IPC and with a fine of Rs.200/-. Sentences to run concurrently. Criminal appeal No.673 of 1999 has been filed against this conviction. 6. That they had threatened him of dire consequences if he did not deliver possession of the land in dispute and also, if he filed the present appeal. 7. That the appellant with great difficulty and at the risk of his life has contacted his counsel now with the instructions that the appeal be re- filed. 8. That the execution petition is fixed for 13.2.2010 before the executing court. 9. That due to this genuine difficulty a delay of 2686 days has occurred in re-filing the appeal. 10. That the application is being filed bona and in the interest of justice.” R. S. A. No. 527 of 2010 (O&M) 3 Bare perusal of the aforesaid grounds reveal that there is no ground, much less sufficient ground for condonation of long delay of more than 7 years and 4 months. Such long delay cannot be condoned merely for the asking. The appellant was handicapped even when the appeal was originally filed and is still handicapped when it was re-filed after delay of more than 7 years and 4 months. It could also be re-filed within limitation period or within reasonable period when the applicant-appellant continued to be handicapped throughout. As regards sentence of imprisonment in some criminal case, awarded to the applicant-appellant, the same was before the original filing of the appeal and had nothing to do with the delay in re-filing the appeal. On the other hand, the applicant-appellant has alleged threats at the hands of opposite party. However, it was the applicant-appellant himself, who was convicted for serious offence under Section 307 IPC for attacking the opposite party. The appeal has now been re-filed after long delay to stall the execution petition filed by the opposite party, which is pending before the Executing Court since long. The instant application seeking condonation of delay of more than 7 years and 4 months is clear abuse of process of Court and deserves to be dismissed with heavy exemplary cost. The application is accordingly dismissed with cost quantified at Rs.10,000/-, to be deposited with the Registry of this Court. If cost amount is not deposited within one month, the case shall be listed for this purpose. Main Appeal : Since the appeal was not re-filed within limitation period, and application for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal has been dismissed, the appeal is also dismissed. February 05, 2010 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE