Union of India & Others versus Gian Dass & Another Arb. Appeal No. of 2026 09.10.2026 Present: Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate vice Ms. Ritu Sharma, Advocate for the applicants. Ms. Ayushi Negi, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.2. OMP (M) No.375 of 2026 Notice issued to respondent No.1 received back after due service. Despite service, no one has put appearance on behalf of respondent No.1. Further wait is not justifiable. By way of the present application, indulgence of this Court has been sought to condone the delay as occurred in filing the accompanying appeal. The delay has been sought to be condoned on the ground that the certified copy of the impugned judgment dated 12.11.2025 was misplaced and despite best efforts the same could not be traced. Although, reply to the application has not been filed, however, the prayer, as made in the application has been opposed by the learned Deputy Advocate General, by tooth and nail. The applicants, being impersonal machinery, act through the human agency and it is not in dispute that before filing the appeal, matter has to be dealt with at various levels. Even otherwise, at the time of deciding the application, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, a liberal approach has to be adopted, as, the matter should be decided on merits and not on technicalities. Consequently, the present application is allowed and the delay of 69 days, as occurred in filing the appeal is ordered to be condoned. The application stands disposed of. Arb. Appeal No. of 2026 Be registered. Admit. Let notice be issued to respondent No.1, returnable within a period of three weeks, on taking steps within a period of seven days. OMPST No.22844/26 Due to technical defect, learned counsel for the applicants, seeks permission to withdraw the present application, at this stage. Permission granted. The application is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. (Virender Singh) Judge October 09, 2026 (ps)