Samuben Ishwarbhai Parmar vs Sardulsingh Dilipsing Jat
2021 Latest Caselaw 1829 Guj

          C/CA/2825/2020                                      ORDER




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                  R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2825 of 2020

                    In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 25422 of 2020

==========================================================
               SAMUBEN ISHWARBHAI PARMAR & 5 other(s)
                              Versus
                SARDULSINGH DILIPSING JAT & 3 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
RULE UNSERVED(68) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI

                             Date : 08/02/2021
                              ORAL ORDER

Heard learned advocate Mr.Nishit Bhalodi for the applicant and learned advocate Ms. Kirti Pathak for the respondent no.6.

Learned advocate Ms.Kirti Pathak waives service of notice of rule for the respondent no.4-Insurance Company.

Though served, none appears for respondent nos.2 and 3.

By way of the present application, the applicant has prayed for condonation of delay of 559 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 26.02.2018. It is further stated that the certified copy of impugned award was available on 28.02.2020 and thereafter, the said copies were submitted to the High Court. It is further stated that the applicant had to collect the necessary papers and arrange for expenses and therefore, delay has occurred. At the

C/CA/2825/2020 ORDER

outset,learned advocate for the applicant, on instructions, states that as the delay is of 559 days, the applicant shall forgo interest of 359 days out of 559 days of delay.

It is also stated by the learned advocate for the applicant that delay is not deliberate and there is no negligence on the part of the applicant.

The explanation rendered by the learned advocate for the applicant deserves consideration. It seems that the delay occurred in filing the First Appeal is not intentional or with any mala fide intention.

Accordingly, delay of 559 days occurred in filing the appeal is condoned. However, as stated by Mr.Nishit Bhalodi, learned advocate for the applicant, the applicant shall forgo interest of 359 days out of 559 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) ABHISHEK