Harbans Lal vs Sher Singh And Others

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 18848 P&H
Judgement Date : 24 October, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Harbans Lal vs Sher Singh And Others on 24 October, 2024

Author: Anoop Chitkara

Bench: Anoop Chitkara

                                         Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:139915




CRM-A-138-MA-2013                    1


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                            AT CHANDIGARH


201                                            CRM-A-138-MA-2013 (O&M)
                                               Date of Decision: 24.10.2024


Harbans Lal                                                         ......... Applicant
                                               Versus

Sher Singh and others                                               ......... Respondents

CORAM:         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:       Mr. Rohit Sephiya, Advocate for
               Mr. Rai Singh Chauhan, Advocate
               for the applicant.

               Mr. Amrit Paul Nahar, Advocate for
               Mr. Munish Puri, Advocate
               for respondent No. 2.


                             ****

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)

1. Aggrieved by judgment dated 04.02.2012, whereby the complaint for defama)on was dismissed, the complainant had come up before this Court by filing the present leave to appeal in the year 2012. The same was dra,ed on 10.04.2012 and it is pending for the last about 12 years. This Court did not grant leave for twelve long year and in between the applicant-Harbans Lal unfortunately expired.

2. Since, there was a delay in filing leave to appeal, as such, the applicant/complainant had also filed an applica)on for condona)on of delay.

3. Vide order dated 03.07.2013, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court had issued no)ces on the delay applica)on. The respondents had appeared in the year 2015 but did not file any reply to the delay applica)on. In between, the applicant/complainant expired and vide order dated 31.08.2018, legal representa)ves of applicant/complainant were permi7ed to subs)tute him. Although, reply to the delay applica)on has not been filed, despite that the applicant must explain the reasons for delay. A perusal of the applica)on reveals that no reasons have been men)oned at all about the delay in filing leave to appeal. The only thing 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 29-10-2024 23:10:26 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:139915 CRM-A-138-MA-2013 2 which has been men)oned is that the delay is not inten)onal. These are not sufficient grounds to condone the delay.

4. Given above, the applica)on for condona)on of delay is dismissed and consequently, the leave to appeal is also dismissed. All pending miscellaneous applica)ons, if any, stand disposed of.



                                                           (ANOOP CHITKARA)
                                                               JUDGE
24.10.2024
Jyo -II

                          Whether speaking/reasoned        Yes/No
                             Whether Reportable            Yes/No




                                     2 of 2
                ::: Downloaded on - 29-10-2024 23:10:26 :::