Gujarat High Court
National Insurance Co. Ltd., Valsad vs Rasikbhai Kalubhai Vadhu on 3 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3368/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3368
of 2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 18160 of 2025
==========================================================
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., VALSAD
Versus
RASIKBHAI KALUBHAI VADHU & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MASUMI V NANAVATY(9321) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RITURAJ M MEENA(3224) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2,4,5,6,7
UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 03/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application has been preferred for seeking condonation of delay of 130 days caused in preferring the appeal against the impugned judgment and award dated 21.09.2024 passed in M.A.C.P. No.98 of 2020.
2. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the delay of 130 days in preferring the appeal occurred owing to the reasons that the necessary papers were sent from branch office to head office of the Insurance Company for seeking the Page 1 of 2 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Oct 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 07 00:54:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/3368/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025 undefined permission to prefer the appeal, therefore, the applicant could not prefer the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation.
4. The notices have been duly served upon all the respondents. Despite service of notices, they have chosen not to appear before the Court when the matter was called out.
5. However, learned advocate Mr. Digvijay Singh appearing on behalf of the learned advocate Mr. Rituraj M. Meena for the respondent no.3 submitted that considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, the appropriate order may be passed.
6. Considering the fact that the delay has occurred owing to the transmission of the record from the branch office to the head office and in conveying the necessary instructions for briefing, in my view, the cause shown is sufficient to condone the delay. Hence, the delay of 130 days caused in preferring the appeal is hereby condoned. The present Civil Application stands allowed. No order as to costs. The present application is disposed of.
7. Registry is directed to reflect the name of the learned advocate Mr. Rituraj M. Meena for respondent No. 3 in the cause list of the First Appeal.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J) CDP Page 2 of 2 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Oct 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 07 00:54:20 IST 2025