RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.--- Petitioner is aggrieved by Sindh High Court order dated 14-3-2006 whereby its prayer for re-admission of High Court Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution and default in appearance on 2-5-2002 was declined.
2. Instead of moving an application under Order XLI, rule 19, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 within thirty days, petitioner, for the first time moved such application on 26-1-2006, seeking condonation of delay on flimsy grounds, which was heard by a Division Bench of the High Court and dismissed vide order impugned in this petition.
3. We have heard Mr. Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui, learned Advocateon-Record for the petitioner and gone through the facts and circumstances leading to the impugned order of the High Court.
Perusal of the order clearly tends to show that the conduct and attitude of the petitioner- Corporation in prosecuting the remedy before the High Court was casual, indifferent and far from being satisfactory. At any event, no adequate ground for special treatment other than an ordinary litigant to the petitioner, muchless a "sufficient cause", for exercise of indulgence and discretion in favour of the petitioner is made out. Law is well-settled and we may refer to Zulfiqar Ali v. Lal Din 1973 SCM R 573, which fully supports the view taken by the High Court and reaffirmed by us.
4. For the aforesaid facts, circumstances and reasons, there is no ground for interference and no case for grant of leave is made out. Petition is, therefore, dismissed.