VINEY MITTAL, J. - (1.) For the reasons stated in the application the delay filing the present appeal is condoned.
(2.) The plaintiff has lost before the first Appellate Court and is in appeal before this Court. He filed a suit for declaration and for permanent injunction., challenging the notices issued under Sections 17 (1) and 17 (2) of the Haryana Urban Development Act. It was claimed that the aforesaid notices dated June 11, 2006 and August 6, 2001 were illegal, bad and violative of the principles of natural justice and were not binding upon the plaintiff.
(3.) The facts which emerge from the record show that the plaintiff had purchased a booth in the year 1988. At the time of the initial allotment, he had deposited 10% of the sale price. 15% of the price was deposited later on.;