Gujarat High Court
Rabari Sunilbhai Rupabhai vs Hussain Ismile Sati on 4 February, 2021
Bench: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati
C/CA/1938/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1938 of 2020
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4054 of 2020
================================================================
RABARI SUNILBHAI RUPABHAI
Versus
HUSSAIN ISMILE SATI
================================================================
=
Appearance:
MR. BK. RAJ(3794) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR TANMAY B KARIA(6833) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 4,5,6
RULE UNSERVED(68) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
SERVED BY AFFIX. (R)(67) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI
Date : 04/02/2021
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned advocate Mr.B.K.Raj for the applicant, learned
advocate Mr.Tanmay Karia for the respondent no.3 and learned advocate
Ms. Kirti Pathak for the respondent no.6.
By way of the present application, the applicant has prayed for
condonation of delay of 328 days in preferring the appeal.
Learned advocate for the applicant has stated that the impugned
judgment and award was passed by the learned Tribunal on 23.10.2018. It
has further stated that the certified copy of impugned award was available
on 23.10.2018. At the outset ,learned advocate for the applicant, on
instructions, states that as the delay is of 328 days, the applicant shall
forgo interest of 128 days out of 328 days of delay. Learned advocate for
the applicant has submitted that the delay is not an intentional or for some
C/CA/1938/2020 ORDER
ulterior motive. Delay caused in the filing of this first appeal is not so
huge and heavy. The Insurance Company did not satisfy the award
immediately and there was a huge delay in receiving the amount of award
because of the delay attributable to the Insurance Company. Appellant
had to suffer from the severe financial problems to manage the expenses
of the further litigation - appeal, therefore, the delay has occurred. The
applicant was not satisfied with the old advocate who appeared in the
M.A.C.P. No. 13 of 2016 and therefore, they did not go to the advocate of
the High Court who was referred by him. Finally, the applicant met
another advocate in Vadodara and he guided them that they should prefer
an appeal. This way sometime was consumed in applying for papers and
certified copies of the order form the Court and with utmost promptness,
the applicant has forwarded the papers to the current advocate and
therefore, some delay has occurred. He further submitted that he had
certain social, health and financial problems in the last 6 months,
therefore, some delay has been occurred. It appears stated that there is no
mala fide or intentional delay.
Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties, delay
of 328 days occurred in filing the appeal is condoned. However, as stated
by Mr.Raj, learned advocate for the applicant, the applicant shall forgo
interest of 128 days out of 328 days of delay.
Accordingly, the present application is allowed to the
aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J)
VARSHA DESAI
