- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties on the delay condonation application and considered the record of the case.
(2.) COUNTER and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged.
(3.) AS per report of the Stamp Reporter dated 22.12.2005, the instant appeal is beyond time by 1 year and 155 days. I have also gone through the contents of affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application. The impugned judgment and order is dated 15.04.2004 passed by Additional District Judge, Fast Tract Court -I, Bareilly, in Civil Appeal No.02 of 2000 Mohd. Yusuf Vs. Officer Incharge Enemy Property and others, whereas this defective appeal was filed on 22.12.2005. It transpires that the concerned department took its own time in completing formalities which have been tried to be explained through the affidavit. A perusal of averments mentioned in paragraph nos. 2 to 11 of the affidavit pertain to various steps taken from one official to another official of the concerned Govt. department reasonably raises question about assumed lacklustre approach on the part of the appellant instead of sincere efforts in the filing of the instant appeal within time. The whole exercise undertaken by the officials questions the bonafides of the appellants in preferring the appeal in time. In this view of the matter the delay so occurred is out come of negligent and perfunctory attitude of authorities concerned.;