Gujarat High Court
Savitaben Ramanbhai Ganvit vs Mohammad Hanif Abdul Karim Shaikh on 14 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/6144/2024 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 6144 of
2024
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 35376 of 2024
==========================================================
SAVITABEN RAMANBHAI GANVIT & ORS.
Versus
MOHAMMAD HANIF ABDUL KARIM SHAIKH & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR TANMAY B KARIA(6833) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 14/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Nishit Bhalodi, learned advocate on record for the applicants-original claimants.
2. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, rule is duly served upon the respondents. Learned advocate Mr. Tanmay Karia has appeared on behalf of respondent no.2-S.T. Corporation.
3. 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 986 days caused in preferring the appeal.
Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 15 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 15 23:00:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/6144/2024 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined
4. Learned advocate for the applicants has referred to the averments made in the application, and has submitted that though the impugned judgment and award was pronounced on 01.01.2022, the certified copy of the same was applied on 18.04.2024, which was received by the applicant on 01.05.2024. Learned advocate has submitted that initially the award amount was accepted, however, after seeking legal advise, noticing the identical case being decided on higher side, the applicants had approached the advocate practicing in the High Court for availing appropriate remedy available in law. It is further submitted that the applicants have handed over the Vakalatnama on 30.03.2024. The further time was consumed in making arrangement for the legal expenses to be incurred, which was handed over on 12.04.2024 and ultimately the copy of the judgment was forwarded to the advocate practicing in the High Court on 03.05.2024. By referring to the aforesaid events, learned advocate has submitted that the appeal was submitted before the Registry on 12.12.2024. Learned advocate has, therefore, urged this Court to take liberal approach as the applicants are the claimants who intend to present their case for enhancement. According to him, the claimants are able to establish their case for just and fair compensation, they may not be ousted on the technical ground of delay.
Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 15 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 15 23:00:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/6144/2024 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined
5. Learned advocate Mr. Tanmay Karia has appeared for respondent no.2-S.T. Corporation has vehemently objected to the aforesaid prayers by submitting that there is huge delay in approach in appeal before this Court. He has further submitted that considering the explanation offered, there is no explanation worth with regard to the period between May-2024 to December-2024, which substantially contributes to condonation of delay. He has, therefore, urged this Court to dismiss the present application. Alternatively, he has urged this Court to issue appropriate directions to waive the interest for the interregnum period of delay and to award costs.
6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and having considered the aforesaid submissions of learned advocates, in light of the averments made in the application, as rightly pointed out by learned advocate for the respondent, the affidavit lacks the explanation of the period between May-2024 to December- 2024, as is evident from the record. However, noticing the benevolent legislation, in order to meet with the object of enactment to provide just and fair compensation, this Court is inclined to accept the prayer of condonation of delay of 986 days caused in preferring the appeal. However, at the same time, in order to balance the interest of the respondents as well, the present application is allowed on condition Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 15 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 15 23:00:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/6144/2024 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined that the claimants shall not be entitled to seek interest for the interregnum period of delay caused in preferring the appeal.
7. The present application is allowed, subject to cost of Rs.5,000/-, to be deposited with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority within a period of two weeks from today.
8. With these observations, present Civil Application is allowed, and stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
9. Registry is directed to reflect the name of learned advocate Mr. Tanmay Karia for the respondent no.2-S.T. Corporation in the main appeal.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) SUYASH SRIVASTAVA Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Jul 15 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 15 23:00:06 IST 2025