Court No. - 17 Case :- SECOND APPEAL No. - 117 of 2002 Appellant :- Sukhdeo Respondent :- Smt. Ramapati And Others Counsel for Appellant :- J.N. Kesarwani,Dev Kr. Tripathi,Mohd.Adil Khan,Mohd.Shadab Khan,W.A.Khan Counsel for Respondent :- D.N.Tripathi Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. (C.M. Application No. 5 & 6 of 2025) Present substitution application has been preferred on 9.1.2025 for substituting the legal heirs of sole appellant who has expired on 12.05.2015 alongwith delay condonation application. Sri D.N. Tripathi, learned Advocate and Sri Adil Khan, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of respondents have submitted that even the copy of delay condonation application and the substitution application have not been served upon them. The office has accepted the application without pointing out the defect that the copies of the applications were not served upon the respondents. The reasons for condonation of delay has been explained in Para 4 and 5 of the affidavit filed alongwith the delay condonation application, which are as under: "4. That legal heirs of the Appellant were not aware with procedure of court's proceedings that's why they could not filed substitution application within time due lack of knowledge of procedure of this Hon'ble Court. 5. That the deponent recently met with his counsel, who told him to file the instant substitution application with delay application and same is being filed without further delay." From perusal of the reasons indicated that the appellant were not aware with procedure of court's proceedings that's why they could not filed the substitution application. There is no denial that the applicants were not in the knowledge of the pendency of the present second appeal. In para 5 it has been stated that the deponent recently met with his counsel, the date when she has met has not been disclosed in the application. There is delay of near about 10 years in filing the substitution application. The reasons shown in the aforementioned paras of the affidavit filed alongwith the delay condonation application are not satisfactory. Accordingly, the delay condonation application is rejected. Since, the delay condonation applicant in filing the substitution application is rejected, the substitution application is also rejected. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 S. Kumar Digitally signed by :- SANTOSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench