No. 3/30.03.2011.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA, PRESIDENT.

Appellant is present through Ld. Advocate Mr. Swarajit Dey.  Mrs. Koyeli Mukhopadhyay, the Ld. Advocate files Vokalatnama on behalf of Respondent No. 1.

This appeal has been filed out of time by about 230 days.  The impugned order has been passed on 17.03.2010.  It has been stated on behalf of the Appellant that since the impugned order was passed ex parte so the Appellant was not aware of the same.  The Appellant came to know of the same for the first time some time in the month of August, 2010 and thereafter applied for the certified copy and after obtaining the certified copy this appeal has been filed on 09.11.2010.  Hence the aforesaid delay.

But most unfortunately the record speaks otherwise.  From the certified copy of the impugned order which has been annexed to the memo of appeal it clearly appears that the free copy of the impugned order was despatched to the Appellant on 07.04.2010.  Furthermore, the certified copy was applied for by the Appellant on 07.04.2010 and on that very date the same was ready for delivery.  The Appellant took delivery of the same on 30.09.2010 i.e. after a lapse of about six months.  These facts expose the falsity of the explanation given in the above application.  Furthermore, there is no explanation whatsoever in the above application for condonation of delay as to the period from 07.04.2010 when the certified copy was made ready for delivery till the date when the same was taken delivery of.  In the absence of such explanation and in the facts and circumstances above we are not inclined to condone the delay in filing this appeal.  The application for condonation of delay is accordingly dismissed.  The appeal shall stand dismissed being barred by limitation.