Himachal Pradesh High Court
CMP.M/596/2026 of SOHNI Vs SUDESH KUMARI AND OTHERS on 13 August 2026
Kumari CMP(M) No. 596 of 2026 13.08.2026 Present: Mr. Paresh Sharma, Advocate, for the applicant. Respondents No. 1 & 2. proceeded against ex- parte vide order dated 01.07.2026. Mr. Peeyush Dhanotia, Advocate, vice Mr. Gurinder Singh Parmar, Advocate, for respondents No. 3 to 7. CMP(M) No.
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.
Sohni vs. Sudesh Kumari CMP(M) No. 596 of 2026 13.08.2026 Present: Mr. Paresh Sharma, Advocate, for the applicant. Respondents No. 1 & 2. proceeded against ex- parte vide order dated 01.07.2026. Mr. Peeyush Dhanotia, Advocate, vice Mr. Gurinder Singh Parmar, Advocate, for respondents No. 3 to 7. CMP(M) No. 596 of 2026 The present application has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the main appeal. It has been averred in the application that impugned judgment and decree was passed by the learned first appellate court on 4.9.2025. The applicant enquired from the counsel about the fate of the case in the first week of December 2025, who informed him that the case has been decided in the month of September 2025 and he could not inform the applicant due to his busy schedule at that relevant time and thereafter he forgot about the same. The applicant approached the counsel and requested him to apply copy of the decision. Copy of the impugned judgment and decree, dated 4.9.2025 was applied on 10.12.2025 and received by the applicant on 19.12.2025. It has been further averred that the aforesaid delay is neither intentional nor deliberate, but has occurred due to unavoidable circumstances, which were beyond the control of the applicant.
Learned counsel for respondents No. 3 to 7, on instructions, submits that he has no objection in case the application is allowed. In view of the averments as made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit and keeping in view the fact that the learned counsel for the non-applicants have no objection, the present application is allowed, and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. RSA No. ______/2026 Be registered. List for admission on 18.08.2026.
(Romesh Verma) Judge August 13, 2026 (Nisha)