Gujarat High Court
Ojas Jyotishbhai Vora vs Nirmalsinh Jadeja on 28 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1547/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1547 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 34318 of 2024
==========================================================
OJAS JYOTISHBHAI VORA
Versus
NIRMALSINH JADEJA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR TANMAY B KARIA(6833) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 28/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Hemal Shah, learned advocate on record for the applicant- original claimant. Learned advocate Mr. Tanmay B. Karia has entered his appearance on behalf of respondent no.2-S.T. Corporation. Notice issued by this Court upon respondent no.1 being the driver of the S.T. Bus, is reported to have been duly served. However, no appearance has been entered on his behalf.
2. The present application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, read with Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, praying for condonation of delay of 1778 days caused in preferring Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:30:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1547/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025 undefined the appeal.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant has invited my attention to the averments made in the application, and has submitted that though the impugned judgment and award was pronounced on 23.10.2019, the amount being realized in the month of January-2021, the applicant who is otherwise engaged in the office work and extends his services in a Social Service Group, was unable to approach in appeal within the stipulated period of time, because of his engagement. He has further submitted that the applicant had, in fact, provided the case papers to the Trial Court's advocate with a belief that the appeal would be preferred. However, despite his instructions, it was later on learnt that the appeal has not been submitted. He has further pointed out that further affidavit filed on 27.06.2025 reiterating the fact that because of oversight, the appeal of the applicant was not submitted and it was only when the applicant had contacted the Trial Court's advocate on 20.11.2024, the applicant came across the fact that no appeal has been filed, till date.
3.1 By referring to the aforesaid circumstances, learned advocate has further submitted that the applicant being the original claimant intends to pursue the remedy of appeal to seek enhancement of Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:30:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1547/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025 undefined amount of compensation. He has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Development Authority vs Jagan Singh & Ors. reported in 2023 SAR (Civil) 921 (Neutral Citation: 2023 INSC 620), and has submitted that the applicant is agreeable to waive the interest for the interregnum period of delay, in case, if he succeeds in appeal. He has, therefore, urged this Court to condone the delay.
4. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Tanmay Karia appearing for the respondent no.2-S.T. Corporation has vehemently objected to the aforesaid submissions made by learned advocate for the applicant. Referring to the explanation offered, learned advocate has submitted that the same cannot be treated as a sufficient cause, in order to exercise the discretion by this Court to condone the delay.
5. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and having perused the averments made in the application and the further affidavit filed by the applicant, it is evident that only explanation, which is offered by the applicant, is the fact that the papers, which were handed over by the applicant to prefer an appeal, the advocate of the Trial Court has failed to file the appeal before this Court, and it was only in the month of November-2024, when the Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:30:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1547/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025 undefined applicant inquired about the status of appeal, he came across the fact that no appeal has been filed. The aforesaid fact has been stated on oath, which has not been controverted by the respondent by filing any affidavit. Taking liberal view, more particularly, noticing the object of benevolent legislation, this Court is inclined to exercise its discretion to condone the delay. Hence, delay of 1778 days caused in preferring the appeal, is hereby condoned. However to strike out the balance, noticing the huge number of days of delay involved, the delay is condoned subject to condition that the applicant shall not be entitled to any interest for interregnum period of delay caused in preferring the appeal, in the event, the applicant succeeds in appeal.
6. With these observations, present Civil Application stands disposed of.
7. Registry is directed to reflect the name of learned advocate Mr. Tanmay Karia representing the respondent no.2 in the main appeal as well.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) SUYASH SRIVASTAVA Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:30:26 IST 2025