1. NASM HASAN SHAH, J.-This petition is in time so far as the order dated 23-9-1979 passed in review is concerned, but is barred by 206 days insofar as the main order dated 18-3-1976 passed by the High Court is concerned.
2. Mr. A. R. Shaukat concedes that he is unable to challenge the correctness of the order dated 23-9- 1976 passed on merits, and that ;t is the main order passed by the High Court or merits dated 18-3- 1976 with which he is really aggrieved. However, it is obvious that before he can challenge the said order, he has to cross the bar of limitation.
3. We are not satisfied with this explanation. It is difficult to accept that the petitioners were not aware of the litigation which their predecessor---in-interest was conducting for the past several years with the respondents and that in any case they could have, with due diligence, discovered the factum of this litigation. We also observe that the review petition was dismissed by the High Court, inter alia, on the ground of being barred by time where the same explanation as offered to us was given. We agree with the High Court that the excuse for condonation of delay was not satisfactory and could not, therefore, be accepted. No ground for condonation of delay is made out. This petition is accordingly dismissed as barred by time. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.