Chandrikaben Narotambhai Patel vs Parshwanath Travels Pvt Ltd
2021 Latest Caselaw 1595 Guj

          C/CA/4740/2019                                            ORDER




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4740 of 2019
              In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 30969 of 2019
==========================================================
             CHANDRIKABEN NAROTAMBHAI PATEL
                            Versus
               PARSHWANATH TRAVELS PVT LTD
==========================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR TANMAY B KARIA(6833) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3,4
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA

                                 Date : 03/02/2021

                        ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)

Heard learned advocate Mr.Nishit Bhalodi for the applicants and learned advocate Mr.Tanmay Karia for respondent No.2. Other respondents are shown to be served with Rule of this Court but nobody has appeared on their behalf.

2. By way of this application, delay of 80 days is prayed to be condoned by the applicants- appellants. The delay has taken place in challenging the judgment and award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.398 of 2011 dated 15th March, 2019. The appellants seek enhancement in the amount.

3. Explaining the delay, it is stated that certified copy was immediately applied on 19th April,

C/CA/4740/2019 ORDER

2019 which was received on 11th June, 2019, whereafter the advocate was instructed to file appeal. It is stated that the applicants went to the office of learned advocate with Vakilatnama, however certain documents were required by the advocate. It is in this process, time was consumed resulting into delay of aforesaid days.

4. It cannot be said that delay is deliberate. Process was undertaken to instruct the advocate. If the time has elapsed in taking legal opinion etc., the reason could be said to be bona fide when it has resulted into delay of 80 days. Sufficient cause is said to have been made out.

5. Resultantly, delay of 80 days is condoned. Application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J)

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) ANUP