Per Justice G.D. Sharma, J. 1. Order dated 30.11.2007 passed by the learned Divisional Forum Jammu (hereinafter to be referred to as the Forum) has been challenged in appeal which is time barred by 110 days. The application has been given for condonation of delay. The main reason for not filing the appeal in time is that the concerned counsel had not informed the applicant/appellant in time. The application has been opposed by the non-applicants/respondents 1 and 2. 2. Heard the arguments. 3. The record reveals that on the day when the impugned order was passed, no-body was present for the complainant. Even the complainant had remained absent for previous three consecutive dates of hearings. Now, how it can lie in the mouth of the applicant/appellant to pass-on the buck on the advocate who was not present when the impugned order was passed. Both the complainant and his advocate had been remaining absent. 4. We have also perused the impugned order and the appeal appears meritless. In this view of the matter, no "sufficient cause" is found for condoning the delay. Hence the application is dismissed and is consigned to records. The record of the Forum be returned at once.