FAO No.7375 of 2010(O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM No.32456-CII of 2010 in/and FAO No.7375 of 2010(O & M) Date of Decision:26.04.2011 Smt.Bhateri Devi & ors. ....appellants Versus Shri Bhagwan & Ors. .....respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUAMR GARG 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.N.K.Malhotra, Advocate for the appellants *** RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.(ORAL): This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of compensation. There is a delay of 1387 days in filing this appeal. Para No.2 of the application, which is supported by an affidavit of the appellant, reads thus: “That it is submitted the above said appeal was filed within time but the above said appeal was not listed and actually the case was given to Mr.S.S.Ahlawat, Advocate and at that time it was told by the counsel to the appellants that case has been admitted and when it will be listed it will be told to the appellants but now the above said counsel has been expired and it was checked from his clerk then he told that it is not in his knowledge because he has left the job from the above FAO No.7375 of 2010(O & M) 2 said counsel after his death and he is not having any knowledge and even not having any record and due to this reason it was checked from the Registry Branch many times but the record of the instant appeal was not found. Otherwise, lastly in the month of February, 2010, it was again checked through computer but in spite of that the instant appeal was not traced out otherwise the instant appeal is enhancement of the award on account of death and in view of the above said facts and circumstances of the case the delay in filing the appeal was due to the reason mentioned above and even otherwise the appellants are seeking the modification of award and in view of the Motor Vehicle Act, the above act has been made for beneficiary for the claimants who were dependent upon the deceased. So, in view of the above said facts the delay of 1387 may kindly be condoned in the interest of justice.” From the perusal of the paper book, I find that the averments made in this application are contrary to the record. It has been specifically mentioned in the application that the appeal was filed within the limitation. However, this is not the case. The impugned Award was passed on 07.06.2006, whereas the appeal was filed on 19.02.2010,for the first time. The appellants have come to this Court on the basis of a false plea. They are not entitled to any relief. Thus, this application for condonation of delay of 1387 days is dismissed with costs, which are assessed at ` 2000/- to be deposited with State Legal Services Authority, U.T.Chandigarh, within one month from today. In case of failure, on the part of the appellant, the Secretary, FAO No.7375 of 2010(O & M) 3 State Legal Services Authority, Chandigarh, shall be entitled to recover the same as the arrears of land revenue. Since the prayer for condonation of delay of 1387 days has been rejected, this appeal is also dismissed being time barred. (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE 26.04.2011 neenu