C.M.No,1121/C-2006 ' Through this application the applicants Muhammad Azam seeks condonation of delay for filing application on 22-5-2006, seeking readmission of R.F.A.No,123-1998, which was dismissed for non- prosecution on 13-7-2004.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants contended that the date of fixation of R. F. A. No . 123-1998 was not in the knowledge of the applicants while their counsel Mr. Ali Ahmad Awan, Advocate had expired, therefore, their nonappearance is neither deliberate nor international, on gaining knowledge they immediately rushed to the Court, engaged the present counsel Mr. Noor Muhammad Awan, Advocate and filed the application for restoration along with the instant application for condonation in which the delay in filing the application has been adequately explained.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and perused the applications and the affidavit attached therewith.
4. The appeal was admitted to regular on 18-5-1998 and the appellants/applicants were represented by M/s. Ali Ahmad Awan and Muhammad Hanif Chaudhry, Advocates. Thereafter both the counsel appeared in the proceedings on 21-9-2000 while none turned up on 22-10-2003 and the proceedings were adjourned. On 21-6-2004 Mr. Muhammad Hanif Chaudhry, Advocate appeared in the proceedings and informed the Court that Mr. Ali Ahmad Awan, Advocate had expired and that brief was not with him and obtained a short adjournment.
5. It thus appears that pendency of the proceedings was in the knowledge of Muhammad Hanif, Advocate who was counsel for the applicants/appellants and it was on his request that proceedings were adjourned. Thereafter his name was reflected in the cause list but he did not appear resultantly proceedings were dismissed for non-prosecution. No convincing reason has been made out for non-appearance of the counsel and also as to why is there such a massive delay in filing the application for restoration. There also is no credible explanation as to how the applicants gained knowledge of the dismissal of the appeal. The affidavit of Muhammad Hanif, Advocate is conspicuously missing in the present matter. Therefore, this petition warrants no interference and is dismissed. C.M.No,1120/C/2006.
' For the reasons stated in C.M.No,1121-C of 2006, this application is barred by time, therefore, is hereby dismissed.