Gujarat High Court
Divisional Controller, Gujarat State ... vs Fatamaben Mohmad Siraj Shekh @ ... on 23 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4269/2024 ORDER DATED: 23/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 4269 of
2024
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 22143 of 2024
================================================================
DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION
Versus
FATAMABEN MOHMAD SIRAJ SHEKH @ BHARATBHAI THAKAR & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MS SEJAL K MANDAVIA(436) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
DELETED for the Respondent(s) No. 4,5,6
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 23/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. This is an application, filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking condonation of delay of 773 days, caused in filing the appeal.
2. Heard learned advocate Ms. Sejal K. Mandavia for the applicant and learned advocate Mr. Hiren M. Modi for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that after the judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal a review Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Thu Apr 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 25 01:15:31 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4269/2024 ORDER DATED: 23/04/2025 undefined application was filed by the present applicant stating that after the pronouncement of the judgment and award, applicant came to know that original claimants have received compensation under the Workmen Compensation Act and therefore, the applicant decided to file review application. The review application was filed and the same came to be dismissed on 14.12.2023. Thereafter, the applicant took decision to challenge the impugned judgment and award by way of First Appeal.
4. Per contra, learned advocate for respondent Nos.1,2,3 raised an objection that reasons assigned in the application are not palatable and delay may not be condoned.
5. Having considered the averments made in the application and the fact that a review application was filed by the applicant stating that claimants have received compensation under the Workmen Compensation Act for the accident which has occurred. It also appears from the contention raised by learned advocate for the applicant that for the same accident, original Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Thu Apr 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 25 01:15:31 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4269/2024 ORDER DATED: 23/04/2025 undefined claimants have received compensation under the Workmen Compensation Act as well as under the Motor Vehicles Act. Considering the facts found on record, the delay is required to be condoned and the same is condoned.
6. Registry is directed to reflect the name of learned advocate Mr. Hiren M. Modi for respondent Nos.1 to 3 in the array of parties as and when First Appeal is listed.
(D. M. DESAI,J) RINKU MALI Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Thu Apr 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 25 01:15:31 IST 2025