Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22830 Court No. - 6 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 12317 of 2018 Petitioner :- Union Of India Thru. The Secy. Posts And Telegraph Deptt Andanr Respondent :- The Additional District Judge Court No.6 Hardoi And Anr. Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Verma,Ankit Srivastava,Dr. Ravi Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Anand Shanker Asthana Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging an order dated 09.09.2016 whereby the application under Section 151 CPC was rejected as being filed after three years. 3. The facts in brief are that a suit was decided exparte on 25.05.1992, against which an appeal no. 2 of 1994 was preferred. It is also recorded that apart from preferring an appeal, an application under Order 9 Rule 13 was also preferred, which was dismissed, against which, FAFO No. 282 of 1993 was preferred before the High Court, in which, orders were passed for depositing the decretal amount. Subsequently, the Appeal No. 2 of 1994 was transmitted to the District Court in view of the change of pecuniary jurisdiction which was registered as Appeal No. 44 of 1998. The said appeal too was dismissed for want of prosecution on 07.01.1998. An application was filed seeking recall of the order dated 07.01.1998 along with a delay condonation application, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 1 of 2001, which too was dismissed on 08.08.2002. Challenging the orders passed in Appeal No. 44 of 1998 and Misc. Case No. 1 of 2001, a writ petition was preferred being Writ Petition No. 4069 of 2002, which came to be allowed. The High Court quashed the orders dated 07.01.1998 and 08.08.2002 and the appeal was restored thereafter. In terms of the order passed by the High Court, an application was moved for re-hearing, the said application was filed after a gap of three years on 30.08.2011. The Court also recorded that in terms of the order passed by the High Court, the amount deposited was directed to be withdrawn on furnishing indemnity bond. 4. The counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Zila Ganna Utpadak Sahkari Samiti Ltd. Hardoi Versus Union of India Thru. Its Secy. Post and Telegraph Deptt. and others, 2025: AHC-LKO:3425, however, the said judgment cannot be seen as the order has been passed only on the ground of inordinate delay. 4. Considering the callous manner in which, the petitioners have approached the Courts on various occasion and indulgence was shown once by the High Court, no good ground for interference is made out. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 22.4.2025 Arun Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench