Himachal Pradesh High Court
CMP.M/1351/2026 of AMAR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF HP on 21 August 2026
another vs. State of H.P. CMP(M) No.1351 of 2026 21.08.2026 Present: Mr. Ajay Kumar Dhiman, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Addl. A.G., for the respondent. CMP(M) No.1351 of 2026 The instant application has been filed for condonation of 110 days delay in filing the regular
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Amar Sngh & another vs. State of H.P.
CMP(M) No.1351 of 2026
21.08.2026 Present: Mr. Ajay Kumar Dhiman, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Addl. A.G., for the respondent.
CMP(M) No.1351 of 2026
The instant application has been filed for condonation of 110 days delay in filing the regular second appeal. It has been averred in the application that the impugned judgment was passed by the learned Additional District Judge-I, Solan on 06.04.2026. The applicants approached the counsel for filing of the appeal in the month of June 2026, but the original judgments and decrees were not brought by the applicants and they were asked by the counsel to bring the original documents. Thereafter, the applicant No.1 fell ill due to his heart ailment and old-age complications. Therefore, he could not come to Shimla for filing the present appeal well in time. After recovering from illness, the applicant applied for the documents before the learned courts below, which were supplied to him on 27.07.2026. Thereafter, he immediately and promptly approached the counsel to file the present appeal. It has been contended that the delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor wilful, but the same has occurred under unavoidable circumstances.
The learned counsel for the State has no objection in case the present application is allowed.
Consequently, in view of the averments as made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
RSA No.______ of 2026
Be registered.
Heard. Admitted on the following substantial question of law: Whether the findings of the Ld. Courts below are a result of complete misleading of pleadings, oral and documentary evidence?
Send for records.
List in due course.
( Romesh Verma )
Judge August 21, 2026
(vt)