Prem Chand Jain, J. - (1.) Narain Singh has filed this appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent, against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this court, dated 16th Jan., 1984, by which the judgment and decree of the trial Court were set aside and the divorce petition was dismissed.
(2.) It is not necessary to state the facts, as this appeal is liable to be dismissed, on the ground that the same has been filed beyond the period of limitation and that no sufficient cause has been shown for the condonation of delay. The appeal was filed in this Court on 4th May, 1984. The judgment of the learned Single Judge was given of 16th Jan., 1984. As is averred in the application-Civil Misc. No. 12 of 1986, which averment has been controverted by the appellant, the application for the supply of the certified copy of the judgment of the learned Single Judge was made on 14th Feb., 1984. The certified copy was prepared on 5th April, 1984. As earlier observed, the appeal was filed in this Court on 4th May, 1984. On calculation, it transpires that there is a delay of 27 days in filing the appeal. The appellant in his application for condonation of delay (Civil Misc. No. 1397 of 1984) has stated that the appellant could not receive the copy of the judgment at an early date, that the letter of the Counsel's clerk was received by him quite late and that due to these reasons, a delay of about four or five days has occurred. This averment in the application is patently wrong. Further the reasons given for the condonation of delay, are wholly meaningless and frivolous and do not make out any sense. The appellant has not shown any sufficient cause for the condonation of delay and the appeal is liable to be dismissed on the ground that the some is time barred.
(3.) Consequently, me dismiss the appeal as barred by time, but make no order as to costs. In view of our order dismissing the appeal as barred by time, the Civil Misc. Application No. 12 of 1986 also stands disposed of. Appeal dismissed.;