Gujarat High Court
Ilaben Ashokbhai Rohit vs Chauhan Sanjaysinh Takhatsinh on 29 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2982/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2982 of
2025
In F/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 15329 of 2025
==========================================================
ILABEN ASHOKBHAI ROHIT & ORS.
Versus
CHAUHAN SANJAYSINH TAKHATSINH & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR GIRISH M DAS(2323) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 29/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Nishit A. Bhalodi, learned advocate on record for the applicants-original claimants. Learned advocate Mr. Girish M. Das has entered appearance on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2, and learned advocate Ms. Kirti Pathak has entered appearance on behalf of respondent no.3-Insurance Company.
2. The present application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay of 648 days caused in preferring the Cross-Objection, against the judgment and award dated 11.11.2019 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Anand in Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:52:45 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/2982/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined M.A.C.P. No.706 of 2011, wherein the respondent no.3-Insurance Company has approached in appeal being registered as First Appeal No.1310 of 2023.
3. Learned advocate for the applicants, at the outset, has submitted that the aforesaid appeal of the Insurance Company, though, has been admitted vide order dated 13.04.2023, and the applicants were reminded of the availability of the entire set of papers to be forwarded to the advocate on record. The applicants, in absence of the papers, were unable to forward the same. Learned advocate has further referred to the averments made in the application, and has submitted that the applicant could ultimately collect the papers and forward the same to the advocate on 24.03.2025. It is only after going through the entire set of papers, learned advocate on record had opined that the applicants are required to apply for enhancement of compensation, as the income of the deceased was not properly appreciated by the Tribunal. He has further submitted that time was further consumed in arranging the funds to meet with legal expenses including the Court Fees, which could be arranged by 30.03.2025.In the interregnum, delay of 648 days had crept in.
3.1 By referring to the aforesaid circumstances, learned advocate
Page 2 of 4
Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:52:45 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2982/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
has submitted that there was no mala fide intention to delay the proceedings on part of the present applicants. In fact, they intend to present their case on merits by preferring the cross-objections to seek enhancement of amount of compensation. This Court was reminded of the object of the beneficial legislation. Learned advocate has, therefore, urged this Court to take liberal view, and to condone the delay.
4. Learned advocates appearing for the respective respondents have vehemently objected to the aforesaid submissions, as according to them, the explanation offered cannot be treated as sufficient cause, which prevented them from applying in cross-objections immediately after the admission of appeal. They have, therefore, urged this Court to not entertain the present application. Alternatively, they have urged this Court to direct the waiver of interest, noticing the huge number of days of delay involved in preferring the Cross-Objection.
5. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned advocates for the respective parties and having perused the averments made in the application, which are made on oath, and in absence of any contradictory facts being pointed out by the respondents, this Court is inclined to accept the aforesaid submissions tendered by the Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:52:45 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/2982/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined applicants, to be a sufficient cause, which prevented the applicants to take a final decision to apply in appeal. In the process, the delay has crept in. Further time appears to have been consumed in arranging for the funds. It appears from the record that this Court, vide order dated 03.07.2023, had permitted disbursement of 30% of the deposited award amount. The applicants were, therefore, in receipt of the amount. However, considering the fact that the applicants intend to present their case on merit for enhancement of amount of compensation and noticing the benevolent legislation, which intends to provide just and reasonable compensation, this Court is inclined to exercise the discretion to condone the delay. Hence, delay of 648 days caused in preferring the Cross-Objection, is condoned, on condition that applicants shall not be entitled to the interest on the additional amount of compensation, for this interregnum period of delay, in case, if they succeed in the Cross-Objection.
6. With these observations, the Civil Application is allowed, and stands disposed of.
(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 22:52:45 IST 2025