Harbans Lal vs Sher Singh And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 18848 P&H

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

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:139915

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