Himachal Pradesh High Court
OMPM/132/2026 of UOI AND ANOTHER Vs SUKH RAM AND ANOTHER on 14 July 2026
& another vs. Sukh Ram & another OMP(M) No. 132 of 2026. 14.07.2026 Present: Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for the applicants/ appellants. Mr. Munish Dhatwalia, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.2. OMP(M) No. 132 of 2026.
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.
Union of India & another vs. Sukh Ram & another OMP(M) No. 132 of 2026.
14.07.2026 Present: Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for the applicants/ appellants. Mr. Munish Dhatwalia, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.2. OMP(M) No. 132 of 2026. The present application has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the present appeal. It has been averred in the application that a copy of the judgment dated 02.12.2024 was applied for by the counsel on 11.03.2025, the same was attested on 16.04.2025, and delivered on 07.05.2025. However, the disposal of the case was not within the knowledge of the appellants/applicants, as the same was never intimated to the appellants by its counsel. Earlier also, due to the inefficiency and lackadaisical attitude of the law firm/counsel, cases were withdrawn from the said law firm, namely, M/s M.V. Kini & Co., vide letters dated 20.09.2023 and 26.03.2024 (Annexure A-2). It is stated that the applicants were under the bona fide belief that the instant case was pending. It came to the knowledge of the applicants only upon the close of the financial year 2024–2025 that the objection petition pertaining to Muhal Thapna had been disposed of. Thereafter, prompt action was taken to obtain the entire case file, and the present appeal was filed immediately. The delay in filing the appeal was due to circumstances beyond the control of the present applicants. The learned counsel for the non-applicants have no objection, in case the present 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 off. Arb. Appeal No.____/2026 (ARBAST No. 70502/2023) Appeal be registered. Heard. Admit. List for hearing in due course. In the meantime, record be requisitioned.
Learned vice counsel for the appellants is directed to supply entire paper book to learned counsel for the respondents during the course of day. OMP No. _____of 2026 (OMPST 630/26) Application be registered. Subject to deposit of entire awarded amount alongwith up-to-date interest by the applicants/appellants, execution, implementation and operation of impugned award dated 20.11.2023, passed by learned Arbitrator and judgment dated 02.12.2024, passed by learned District Judge, Mandi, H.P. in CIS Registration No. 439 of 2024, shall remain stayed during the pendency of appeal. Needful be done within eight weeks from today. Application stands disposed of.
(Romesh Verma) Judge July 14, 2026 (Nisha)