Item No. D-3 Tilak Ram & others Vs. Himachal Pradesh State Co-operative Milk Producer Federation & others. CMP(M) No. 1245 of 2024 13.05.2025 Present: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No. 2. CMP(M) No. 1245 of 2024 This application has been filed for condoning the delay of 146 days’ in filing the present appeal challenging the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge on 31.10.2023 in CWP No. 4700 of 2022. 2. The case of the appellants/applicants is that actual monetary benefits have been denied and only notional benefits have been granted to them, though the writ petition had been allowed. It is averred in the application that the judgment was pronounced on 31.10.2023 and after winter vacation, when the applicants approached their Counsel, they were made aware of the fact that they were entitled to actual monetary benefits and immediately, thereafter, the appeal was filed. 3. This application has been opposed by the respondents, wherein it has been averred that the judgment has been complied with and the execution petition and contempt petition filed by the applicants have also been disposed of. Counsel for the respondents has also placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 7696 of 2021, Majji Sannemma @ Sanyasirao Vs. Reddy Sridevi & others. 4. We have gone through the aforesaid judgment, wherein there was a delay of 1011 days in preferring the second appeal. In the said case, the appeal was allowed and the impugned order was quashed and set aside. The said judgment is not applicable to the present case as the facts of the aforesaid case are different from that of the present case. 5. Keeping in view the settled principles of law laid down in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs. Smt. Katiji and others, (1987) 2 SCC 107, that each and every day’s delay is not to be explained, we are of the considered opinion that the application is liable to be allowed as sufficient cause has been made out. Accordingly, the application is allowed and delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 6. Appeal be registered. 7. Issue notice. Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Advocate, waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 and Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, learned Additional Advocate General, waives the same on behalf of respondent No. 2. 8. Now to come up for consideration on 01.07.2025. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge May 13, 2025 (hemlata)