AHMED Versus Rana MAHMOOD AHMAD

MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J. ‑According to office note, this petition is barred by 61 days but in the application made by the petitioner for extension of time, he has assumed as if it is barred by time by 48 days. The impugned judgment was passed by the Lahore High Court on 14‑2‑2001. Application for obtaining certified copy was trade on 21‑3‑2001 which was ready for delivery on 28‑3‑2001. Delivery of the copy was taken on 25‑5‑2001 and this petition was filed on 23‑6‑2001. In the said application seeking extension of time filed by the petitioner in paragraph‑2, reasons of delay have been given which are reproduced below in extenso:‑‑

"(1) That the petitioner has filed the accompanying special petition for leave to appeal, which is time‑barred for 43 days.

(2) That there is sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in the time fixed as the petitioner was suffering badly from Typhoid of a grave stage, therefore, he could not collect the prepared certified copy of the impugned order. Copy of the certificate is attached as Annexure "A".

(3) That the petitioner was advised a complete bed rest by the Medical Superintendent, Civil Hospital, Khanewal, which is a sufficient cause.

(4) That the valuation rights of the petitioner are at the stake and he shall suffer loss if the delay of 48 days is not condoned."

2. It has not been stated in this paragraph as to on which date, the petitioner fell ill and he was advised bed rest. Even otherwise, after collecting certified copy on 25‑5‑2001 though he was bound to collect the same on 28‑5‑2001, no explanation given as to why petition was filed on 23‑6‑2001 after lapse of about one month.

3. The reasons given in the application are no reasons in the eye of law much less sufficient grounds for extension of time, therefore, application made by the petitioner for the purpose has no substance which is hereby dismissed. As a result whereof, the main petition is also dismissed as barred by time and leave refused.

S.A.K./A‑23/S Leave refused.