Delhi High Court
Pratap Singh vs Maqsood & Anr. on 15 April, 2010
Author: Shiv Narayan Dhingra
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Reserve: April 9, 2010
Date of Order:15th April, 2010
CM No. 411/2010 in MAC. APP. No. 8/2010
% 15.04.2010
PRATAP SINGH ... Appellant
Through: Mr. S.L. Gupta, Adv.
Versus
MAQSOOD & ANR ... Respondents
Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Adv.
JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?
JUDGMENT
This application has been made by the appellant for condonation of delay
in filing the appeal against an award of learned MACT whereby the appellant has
sought enhancement in quantum of compensation. The order of learned MACT
against which this appeal is preferred is dated 23rd August, 2008. The appeal
has been filed on 18th November, 2009. The period of limitation for filing the
appeal is 90 days. Thus, there is delay of 362 days. It is submitted by the
appellant that he was prevented from filing the present appeal within the period of
limitation due to the reason that insurance company did not deposit the awarded
amount within the period of one month as ordered by learned MACT. The other
reason given is that the appellant had no knowledge of law and the counsel for
the appellant did not explain to him that he could go in appeal against the amount
of compensation awarded to him. It was only in the month of November, 2009
that a well-wisher informed him that he was allowed to file appeal for
enhancement of compensation.
2. The application is opposed by the counsel for insurance company who stated
that the grounds given by the appellant were no ground in the eyes of law. He
submitted that respondent had deposited the award amount with the Tribunal as
directed and ignorance of law was no ground for condonation of delay.
3. There is delay of 362 days in filing of this appeal. The only explanation
given by the appellant is that he was not aware of his rights of filing appeal. He
was not informed by his counsel that he can file appeal. It is a well known maxim
"Ignorance of law is no excuse" and the delay in filing the appeal cannot be
condoned on the ground that he was not aware that he has a right to file an
appeal. In order to condone the delay in fling the appeal, it is necessary that
court should be satisfied that there were reasonable and sufficient grounds for
condonation of delay. I consider that in this case no justified reason has been
given by appellant for condonation of delay.
5. I find no force in the application. The application for condonation of delay
is hereby dismissed.
+MAC. APP. No. 8/2010
Consequentially, the appeal also stands dismissed being barred by
limitation.
April 15, 2010 SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J.
acm
