Ghanshyambhai Laxmanbhai Chaudhry vs Mansukhbhai Dhanjibhai Devipujak

Gujarat High Court

Ghanshyambhai Laxmanbhai Chaudhry vs Mansukhbhai Dhanjibhai Devipujak on 22 July, 2025

                                                                                                          NEUTRAL CITATION




                              C/CA/4994/2024                              ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025

                                                                                                          undefined




                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY)
                                       NO. 4994 of 2024
                                             In
                               F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 27063 of 2024

                      ======================================
                           GHANSHYAMBHAI LAXMANBHAI CHAUDHRY
                                         Versus
                          MANSUKHBHAI DHANJIBHAI DEVIPUJAK & ORS.
                      ======================================
                      Appearance:
                      MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                      MS DIMPLE A THAKER(6838) for the Respondent(s) No. 7
                      NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
                      RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 8
                      RULE UNSERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 6
                      ======================================

                      CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE

                                                      Date : 22/07/2025

                                                       ORAL ORDER

Heard Mr. Parth Trivedi, learned advocate for Mr. Hiren Modi, learned advocate for the applicant - original opponent no.1, Ms. Dimple Thaker, learned advocate has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent no.7 - insurance company, whereas Mr. Nishit Bhalodi, learned advocate has entered his appearance on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 5

- original claimants.

The rule issued by this Court upon respondent no.6 has remained unserved, who is a driver of the alleged vehicle involved in the accident. Rule has been duly served upon the respondent no.8. However, no appearance has been entered.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4994/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined Considering the limited prayer sought for in the present application, the matter is taken-up for hearing in absence of the respondent no.6.

The present application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking condonation of delay of 841 days caused in preferring the appeal.

The learned advocate for the applicant has mainly relied upon the averments made in the application and has submitted that the applicant became aware about the impugned judgment and award being passed against them exonerating the insurance company. When the certified copy of the order was available in the month of September, 2024, according to them they have been falsely implicated in the accident. The applicant after receiving the certified copy had approached the advocate usually appearing in the matter before the High Court and after seeking necessary advice, the papers were handed over. He has therefore urged this Court that because of the aforesaid circumstances being pointed- out, the applicants were under bonafide impression that their interest is secured in view of the insurance policy being availed from the respondent - insurance company. It is submitted that the applicants are facing execution proceedings and the matters are notified for hearing on 21 st August, 2025. He has therefore urged this Court to condone the delay, as according to him they have good case on merits.

Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jul 28 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 28 21:28:01 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4994/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined advocate of the applicant and in absence of any contradictory facts being pointed-out by the learned advocate for the respective respondents, this Court is inclined to accept the aforesaid explanation to be a sufficient cause which prevented the applicant to not to approach in appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. Noticing the fact that the applicants intends to raise their case of false implication, this Court is inclined to extend them opportunity to represent their case on merits by condoning the delay caused in preferring the appeal. Hence, present application is allowed. The delay caused in preferring the appeal is hereby condoned.

Learned advocate for the applicant is directed to deposit Rs.5,000/- as cost with the Gujarat State Legal Service Authority.

(NISHA M. THAKORE, J.) AMAR RATHOD...