ORDER NO. 3 DT. 18.12.09

Heard Mr. A.K.Bandyopadhyay, Ld. Advocate for the Appellant, in support of the application for condonation of delay and Mr. Stephen Mondal, Ld. Advocate, opposing the same.  It appears from the own case of the Appellant that the first certified copy was obtained and that was misplaced from the office of the Appellant and the second certified copy was obtained in July’09 on the basis of which the present Appeal was filed.  We find from the record that the Appeal was filed actually on 15.10.09 though an application for condonation of delay was filed later followed by an affidavit explaining the delay.  We are not able to find out in the explanation the cause of delay occurred between 21.7.09 and 15.10.09.  The explanation relied on by Mr. Bandyopadhyay is contained in Para-3 of the application, which is absolutely vague and we are unable to appreciate such grounds for explaining such a long period of delay.  It appears from the position that a copy of the judgement was supplied by the Respondent to the Appellant intitially on 22.5.09 followed by a reminder received on 9.6.09.  We are unable to find any explanation either in the application or in the supporting affidavit subsequently.  The explanation is not acceptable in respect of such a long delay.  Therefore, in the circumstances, the explanation and the application is dismissed.  The Appeal accordingly stands dismissed.