IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 110 I. CM-6274-C-2021; CM-6272-C-2021 in/and RSA-1582-2021 (O&M) Sarwan Singh …..Appellants Vs. Union of India and Others .….Respondents II. CM-11-C-2023; CM-10-C-2023 in/and RSA-7-2023 (O&M) Ghasita Singh …..Appellants Vs. Union of India and Others .….Respondents Date of Decision.:28.03.2025 CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Naveen Bawa, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. R.K. Takkar, DAG, Punjab for respondent Nos.2, 9 and 10. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) These two Regular Second Appeals have arisen out of similar facts and circumstances. Plain,ffs in both the suits claimed compensa,on/damages for their illegal deten,on during Opera,on Blue Star, which had taken place in Amritsar in June, 1984. Cases were registered against them. They were tried and ul,mately acqui6ed. 2. Separate suits filed by both the plain,ffs for seeking damages were dismissed by the trial Courts on 30.07.2011 and the appeals preferred NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.04.02 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-1582-2021 (O&M) RSA-7-2023 (O&M) -2- by them were partly decreed by the first Appellate Court on 12.04.2017. 3.1 By way of applica,on bearing No.CM-6272-C-2021 in RSA N: 1582-2021 filed under Sec,on 5 of the Limita,on Act read with Sec,on 151 CPC, appellant Sarwan Singh seeks condona,on of delay of 717 days in refiling the appeal; whereas by way of another applica,on bearing No.CM- 6274-C-2021 in the same appeal, he seeks condona,on of delay of 699 days in filing the appeal. 3.2 Similarly, in RSA-7-2023, applica,on bearing No.CM-11-C-2023 is moved by appellant Ghasita to condone the delay of 716 days in filing the appeal; and CM-10-C-2023 is moved under Sec,on 151 CPC for condoning the delay of 1071 days in refiling the appeal. 4. On behalf of the applicant-appellant Sarwan Singh, it is contended that due to long illegal deten,on of five years, appellant had suffered monetary losses. He could not arrange the Court fee. With great difficulty, he managed sufficient funds to affix the Court fee and then filed the appeal with 699 days delay. It is also submi6ed that the appeal was returned with certain objec,ons by the registry on 31.07.2019. Some documents were required to be filed and in order to collect the same, the delay of 717 days has taken place. 5. Similarly, applicant-appellant Ghasita Singh has pleaded the same reason to the effect that due to his long incarcera,on in custody, he was unable to arrange funds to pay the Court fee and aCer managing the same, he filed the appeal aCer 716 days; and aCer return of the file by the registry, it took ,me to collect the requisite documents and that in the mean,me, COVID-19 had also set in. 6. No,ce of the applica,on was issued and consequently, NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.04.02 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-1582-2021 (O&M) RSA-7-2023 (O&M) -3- appearance has been made on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 2, 9 and 10. 7. I have considered submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and learned State counsel and finds that the grounds pleaded by both the applicants for condoning huge delay in filing the appeal and then subsequent huge delay in refiling the appeal is absolutely not jus,fiable. In case, appellants were not able to arrange sufficient funds to pay the court fee, they could have approached the Court to file the appeal as an indigent person. They could have availed the services of legal services authori,es. No a6empt appears to have been made by them to approach any counsel even to seek legal advice within reasonable ,me. 8. In the above circumstances, this Court does not find the grounds pleaded for condoning the delay to be just, cogent & reasonable. Therefore, all the four applica,ons (two each) as moved in the two appeals as referred above, are hereby dismissed and consequent thereto, both the appeals are hereby dismissed being barred by limita,on. All other miscellaneous applica,on(s), if any, stand disposed of. A photocopy of this order be placed on the connected case file. ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE March 28, 2025 Nee,ka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.04.02 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document