Bhagwati vs Digamber Lal Satnami
2025 Latest Caselaw 4245 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Bhagwati vs Digamber Lal Satnami on 4 September, 2025

         Digitally
             Digitally
         signed  by by
                                                               1/3
             signed
         ASHISH
             ASHISH
ASHISH
   ASHISHTIWARI
             TIWARI
   TIWARIDate:
TIWARI       Date:
             2025.09.04
         2025.09.04
             17:30:47
         17:31:36
             +0530
         +0530




                                       HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                                          Order Sheet

                                                     MAC No. 677 of 2019
                                 BHAGWATI & Ors. versus DIGAMBER LAL SATNAMI & Ors.


                          04/09/2025           Shri Amit Sharma, Advocate for the appellants.

                                               Shri Jayant Das, Advocate appeared on behalf of

                                       Shri Rishi Rahul Soni, Advocate for the respondent

Shri Rajendra Tripathi, Advocate for the respondent No.2.

Shri Sourabh, Advocate appeared on behalf of Shri Ashish

Gupta, Advocate for the respondent No.3.

Heard on IA No. 01/2019 - application for condonation of

delay under Section 5 of Limitation Act.

Learned counsel for the appellants submit that the

appellant having no knowledge of legal procedure, after

dismissal of their claim case from the Learned Motor Accidental

Claim Tribunal, Raigarh, the appellants, took the certified copy

from their counsel, and after that didn't came in contact with their

counsel for the re-appeal before the High Court, but after some

time period, the counsel for the appellant somehow notified and

informed them about the re-appeal in the High Court, as the

appellant are residing in the remote area, they took some time

to reach out to their counsel and when they reached out, the

period for filing of the appeal before this Court, was concluded..

Learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 submits that the

delay is inordinate and no satisfactory explanation is offered

therefore, the application may be rejected. Alternatively, he

submits that in the event the application of condonation of delay

is allowed, and this Court enhanced the compensation, the

insurance company may not be burden with the interest for the

delay caused by the fault of the appellants.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

records.

Of course there is a delay of 1321 days. However, as the

Motor Vehicle Act is benevolent legislation and the delay in these

cases to be consider liberally. Apart from this, it has to be seen

that the appellant No. 2 to 4 are minor and their rights are

required to be protected by this Court, this Court also as to see

just compensation is awarded to the appellants/claimants. At the

same time, this Court is also conscious to the fact that in the

event the compensation is enhanced by this Court, the insurance

company who has no fault, may not be burden with liable to pay

interest for the delay caused by the appellants. Therefore, in the

interest of justice and in light of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme

Court in case of Esha Bhattacharjee Vs. Managing Committee

of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy and others reported in

(2013) 12 SCC 450 and in the case of N. Balakrishnan V. M.

Krishnamurthy reported in (1998) 7 SCC 123, the application

for condonation delay is allowed and delay of 1321 days is

hereby condoned. It is also observed that in the event, the

appeal is allowed and the compensation awarded by the learned

claims Tribunal is enhanced, the appellants may be entitled to

interest from today.

List the case in the week commencing 15th September.

Sd/-

(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

Ashish