' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.--- Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 22-2-2000 whereby F.A.O. No,39 of 2000 filed by the petitioner was dismissed by a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Lahore being hopelessly time-barred.
2. Facts briefly are that a recovery suit was filed by the respondent-Bank against Messrs Sheikh Carpet Pvt. Ltd. Which was decreed by the Judge Banking Court No,4, Lahore vide his judgment, dated 25-11-1998. The Bank filed execution application and the present petitioner filed objection petition before the learned Banking Court. The said objection petition was dismissed vide order dated 10-9-1999 being frivolous and unconvincing. Thereafter, the petitioner remained dormant and moved a miscellaneous application under section 151, C.P.C. Before the Banking Court for the deletion of the property from the execution proceedings. The said application was dismissed on 2- 2-2000. Again the petitioner went into slumber and filed appeal against the order, dated 10-9-1999 on 17-2-2000. This appeal is certainly time-barred as the order impugned was passed on 10-9- 1999 whereas certified copy thereof was obtained on 8-2-2000. The learned Division Bench while dismissing the appeal has given cogent reasons which are in the following terms: ---- "(4) We have considered the contentions of the learned counsel of the appellant/applicant and perused the record ourselves. It is admitted fact that the objection petition was dismissed vide order, dated 10-9-1999. The appellant-applicant filed application for obtaining certified copy of the order, dated 10-9-1999 on 8-2-2000 after a prescribed period for filing appeal under section 21 of Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advance, Credits and Finances) Act, 1997. The appeal is highly time-barred and the learned counsel of the applicant-appellant failed to point out any sufficient cause for condonation of delay. It is settled proposition of law that nobody should be allowed to get the benefit of his own mis-deed/negligence."
3. The learned counsel has not been able to show any illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment calling interference by this Court. This petition is, therefore, dismissed. Leave refused.