Gujarat High Court
Rameshbhai Babulal Bhanushali vs Jagdishkumar Rameshbhai Bhadra ... on 1 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2083/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2083 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 9803 of 2025
==========================================================
RAMESHBHAI BABULAL BHANUSHALI
Versus
JAGDISHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI BHADRA (BHANUSHALI) & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 01/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Nishit Bhalodi, learned advocate on record for the applicant-original claimant.
2. Pursuant to the rule issued by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.04.2025, notice is reported to have been duly effected upon the respondents. However, no appearance has been entered on their behalf. Despite sufficient opportunity being granted, in absence of any appearance being entered by the aforesaid respondents, the present application is taken up for hearing in their absence.
Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Sep 02 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 02 23:25:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/2083/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/09/2025 undefined
3. The present application is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, at the instance of the original claimant praying for conndonation of delay of 616 days caused in preferring the appeal.
4. At the outset, learned advocate appearing for the applicant has drawn my attention to the averments made in the application, and has submitted that the present applicant is the original claimant, who intends to present his appeal for enhancement of amount of compensation. Considering the benevolent scheme of the Act, the Tribunal having failed to extend just and proper compensation, he may not be deprived of the opportunity to satisfy this Court on merits of the case. Learned advocate has, therefore, urged this Court to take liberal approach and to condone the delay. Alternatively, it is submitted that the interest for the interregnum period may not be awarded.
5. From the record, it transpires that no appearance has been filed till date on behalf of the respondents objecting to the prayer sought for in the present application. This Court is, therefore, required to look into the averments made in the application for the purpose of verifying the sufficient cause, in order to consider the prayer for Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Sep 02 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 02 23:25:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/2083/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/09/2025 undefined condonation of delay.
7. It is submitted that the impugned judgment and award though was pronounced on 10.04.2023 and the certified copy was received on 19.04.2023. The applicant was advised by his lawyer to approach in appeal. At that stage, the applicant has realized that arrangement was required to be made towards the legal expenses, to be incurred in filing the appeal. The applicant could gather the funds to meet with legal expenses in the month of September-2023.
8. Considering the explanation offered in Para-3 of the present application and in absence of any contradiction being brought on record against the aforesaid averments being made on oath, this Court is inclined to accept the aforesaid explanation to be a sufficient cause, which prevented the applicant from approaching in appeal within stipulated period of limitation. Noticing the number of days involved, in order to strike out the balance, the present application seeking condonation of delay of 616 days caused in preferring the appeal, is hereby accepted, subject to condition that the applicant shall not be entitled to seek interest for the aforesaid interregnum period of delay caused in preferring the appeal.
Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Sep 02 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 02 23:25:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/2083/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/09/2025 undefined
9. For the foregoing reasons, the present Civil Application is allowed. The delay of 616 days caused in preferring the appeal, is hereby condoned, on condition that the applicant shall not press for interest for the interregnum period of delay, in case, if he succeed in main appeal.
10. With these observations, the present Civil Application stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) SUYASH SRIVASTAVA/SFS/01/09 Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by SUYASH KUMAR SRIVASTVA(HC01570) on Tue Sep 02 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 02 23:25:25 IST 2025