Judgment 1. We heard the counsel for the parties. 2. The impugned order is dated 10th April, 2007. Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred on 21st May, 2008. According to the office report, the appeal suffers from delay of one year fifty three days. 3. For condonation of delay, the appellant has made an application (I.A. No. 3846 of 2008). The nub of the cause shown in the application is that after filing the writ petition, the appellant went out of state for earning livelihood. On 14.5.2008 the appellant visited the office of his advocate and then appeal was preferred. 4. We are afraid, with all liberal approach, the long delay of more than one year and 53 days remains wholly unexplained. The cause shown in the petition does not inspire confidence. Except making bald statement, there is no material placed by the applicant which may persuade us to accept the plea set up in the application. 5. We are, thus, constrained to reject I.A. No. 3846 of 2008 and is dismissed accordingly. 6. Since the appeal is time barred and limitation petition has been dismissed, the appeal has to be dismissed as time barred and we order accordingly.