Bhurkabhai Virsingbhai Minama ... vs Naranbhai Mangabhai Bochia ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 10276 Guj

      C/CA/867/2021                                         ORDER DATED: 02/08/2021




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 867 of 2021

                      In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 9100 of 2021

==========================================================
                  BHURKABHAI VIRSINGBHAI MINAMA BHIL
                                Versus
                 NARANBHAI MANGABHAI BOCHIA HARIJAN
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR R G DWIVEDI(6601) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MS POOJA H HOTCHANDANI(7765) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR CHIRAYU A MEHTA(3256) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

                             Date : 02/08/2021

                                 ORAL ORDER

Heard learned advocate Mr.R.G. Dwivedi for the applicants. Rule is served upon respondent Nos.1 and 2, however none appears. Learned advocate Mr.Chirayu Mehta appears for respondent No.3.

2. This is to condone delay of 126 days which has taken place in preferring the First Appeal which is sought to be condoned by way of this application.

3. Delay has taken place in challenging the judgment and award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Vadodara dated 31st August, 2019 in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.451 of 2016. The appeal is by the claimants seeking enhancement in the compensation.

4. It transpires from the facts stated in this application that the certified copy was immediately

C/CA/867/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/08/2021

applied showing the intention to file appeal. However, communication gap arose as the intimation of availability of certified copy was belatedly made known to the applicants. The applicants, who are residing in remote tribal area, the situation of pandemic and consequential lockdown further contributed the passage of time. Thereafter the applicants contacted advocate and after arranging for money to pay the court fees and legal expenses, appeal was filed.

5. In the totality of circumstances, reasons supplied to explain the delay are bona fide. Delay is sufficiently explained. Delay of 126 days is condoned.

Application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J) ANUP