IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALUTTA
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
04.01.2023
SL No.30
Court No. 654
Ali
F.M.A.T. 335 of 2019
IA No: CAN/1/2019 (Old No.:CAN/10379/2019)
Sanchita Ghoshal & Ors.
Vs.
The National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
Mr. Amit Ranjan Roy
......for the appellants-claimants.
Ms. Sucharita paul
......for the respondent No. 1-Insurance Co.
Re: CAN/1/2019 (Old No.:CAN/10379/2019) This is an application for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal.
Mr. Amit Ranjan Roy, learned advocate for appellants-claimants submits that for taking necessary steps that there has been delay of 350 days in preferring the appeal and he seeks for condonation of such delay.
Ms. Sucharita Paul, learned advocate for respondent No. 1 Insurance Company vehemently opposes such prayer.
As per report of the Additional Stamp Reporter dated 27.03.2019 there is a delay of 350 days in preferring the appeal. Bearing mind the beneficial piece of legislation and the cause shown, I am inclined to condone the delay. Accordingly, delay of 350 days in preferring the appeal is condoned. 2 The application being CAN/1/2019 (Old No.:CAN/10379/2019) stands allowed and disposed of.
The appeal is formally admitted and registered.
FMAT 335 of 2019 This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 21st December, 2017 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track, 1st Court, Asansol in M.A.C Case no. 103 of 2013 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Mr Roy, learned advocate for appellants- claimants submits that all the relevant papers are with him and as such calling for of lower court records be dispensed with and he also undertakes to prepare and file informal paper books. In view of the above, calling for of lower court records is dispensed with for the time being.
Learned advocate for appellants-claimants is directed to prepare and file three sets of informal paper books incorporating all relevant papers and documents including pleadings, both oral and documentary evidence in printed, cyclostyled or typewritten form within a week. One set of such informal paper book be filed in court and another set be served upon learned advocate for respondent No. 1-Insurance Company.
Learned advocate for appellants-claimants further submits that respondent no.2-owner of the 3 offending vehicle as he did not contest the claim application before the learned tribunal. It appears from the impugned judgment that the respondent no.2-owner of the offending vehicle did not contest the claim application before the learned tribunal and case was disposed of exparte against him. In the aforesaid backdrop service of notice of appeal upon respondent no.2-owner of the offending vehicle is dispensed with.
Since respondent no.1 Insurance Company has already entered appearance hence service of notice of appeal upon said respondent No. 1 Insurance Company is also dispensed with.
Let the matter appear after two weeks under the heading "hearing".
(Bivas Pattanayak, J.)