Chandigarh Industrial Tourism Development Corp Ltd v. Sandeep Kapoor

CM No. 4110-LPA of 2026 IN/AND LPA No. 1689 of 2026 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM No. 4110-LPA-2026 IN/AND LPA No. 1689 of 2026 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 01.07.2026 CHANDIGARH INDUSTRIAL AND TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ......APPELLANT Vs.

SANDEEP KAPOOR .........RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL

Present:

Ms. Madhu Dayal, Advocate, for the applicant-appellant. ***** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J.(ORAL) CM No. 4110-LPA-2026 (i) Prayer in the present application, filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with Section 151 CPC, is for condonation of a delay of 137 days in filing the accompanying appeal. (ii) Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the delay of 137 days in filing the accompanying appeal is hereby condoned.

(iii) CM stands disposed of.

LPA No. 1689 of 2026 (O&M) 1.

The present appeal has been filed to set aside the impugned judgment dated 21.11.2025 passed by learned Single Bench in CWP No. 32042 of 2025.

2.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that before passing of the impugned order, time was sought to file reply which was declined NITIN 2026.07.02 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CM No. 4110-LPA of 2026 IN/AND LPA No. 1689 of 2026 (O&M) -2and straightaway an order adverse to the interest of the appellant has been passed by learned Single Judge, whereby the chargesheet has been quashed.

3.

On being asked to point out any such averment about the fact that the time was sought to file the reply before the impugned order was passed by learned Single Judge, learned counsel submits that though such a request was made and declined orally, the same has not been recorded by the learned Single Judge.

4.

In case any such argument raised by a party has not been recorded in the order, the appropriate remedy would be to seek the review of such order/and not to file an appeal.

5.

Hence, in the present facts and circumstances, learned counsel for the appellant submits that she does not press the present appeal any further and prays that the same be disposed of as not pressed, with liberty to file a review before the learned Single Judge. 6.

Ordered accordingly.

7.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE JULY 01, 2026 (AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL) nitin JUDGE Whether Speaking Yes Whether Reportable No NITIN 2026.07.02 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document