2025:HHC:23323 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No. 194 of 2020 Decided on : 18.07.2025 Sh. Budhi Singh. …Petitioner Versus Harbinder Singh and others. …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, Senior Advocate, with M/s Rupesh Kumar and Shekhar Badola, Advocates, for respondent No.1 Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, interia alia, prayed for the following relief:- “1) That the impugned orders passed by the Additional District Judge, Hamirpur dated 30.10.2019 may kindly be quashed as set aside and application filed by the present petitioner under Order 41 Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure may kindly be allowed.” 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:23323 30.10.2019, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Hamirpur, H.P., in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 53 of 2018, in terms whereof an application filed by the petitioner under Order41 Rule 3-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for condonation of delay in filing the Appeal. 3. A perusal of the order passed by the learned Appellate Court demonstrates that the reason as to why the delay in filing the Appeal was not condoned by the learned Appellate Court was that there was variance in the pleadings made in the application viz-a-viz the deposition of the petitioner when he entered the witness box. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute that the findings so returned by the learned Appellate Court are borne out from the record. However, he pleaded that as the delay in filing the Appeal was of just 55 days, it would have been in the interest of justice if the learned Court below had condoned the delay by imposing some reasonable cost. 5. On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent submitted that as there is no infirmity in the order passed by learned Appellate Court, the petition deserves to be 3 2025:HHC:23323 dismissed. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.1 and having perused the order passed by learned Appellate Court, though this Court finds no infirmity therein because it is a matter of record that the grounds pleaded in the application praying for condonation of delay, were at variance with the deposition of the petitioner when he entered the witness box to explain the delay, but this Court is of the considered view that in the light of the fact that delay in filing the Appeal was of 55 days only, it will be in the interest of justice, in case, delay is condoned but by imposition of cost to compensate the respondent. 7. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and order dated 30.10.2019 is set aside, subject to payment of cost of Rs.1,00,000/- by the petitioner to the respondent/plaintiff. Parties through counsel are directed to appear before the learned Appellate Court i.e. Court of learned District Judge, Hamirpur, H.P. at the first instance, on 18.08.2025. It is clarified that in case, the cost imposed by the Court upon the petitioner is paid by way of a Bank Draft drawn in the name of the 4 2025:HHC:23323 respondent/plaintiff, by the petitioner herein on the said date in the Court of learned District Judge, Hamirpur, to the plaintiff then the learned Court, in compliance to this order shall restore the Appeal as well as the application and after passing appropriate order on the application for condonation of delay, will list the Appeal for hearing on merit before the appropriate Court. However, in case, cost is not paid by the petitioner to the respondent/plaintiff, in terms of the order passed by this Court today, then this order shall loose its efficacy and the order dated 30.10.2019, passed by learned Appellate Court, shall govern the field. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 18, 2025 (Shivank Thakur)