Hdfc Ergo General Insurance ... vs Museji Suleman Sihat
2021 Latest Caselaw 2537 Guj

          C/CA/2047/2020                                       ORDER




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                  R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2047 of 2020

                     In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3663 of 2020

==========================================================
        HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
                           Versus
                   MUSEJI SULEMAN SIHAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
ABRAR G SAIYED(9571) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS KHUSHBU P VYAS(7040) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE NOT RECD BACK(63) for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4,5,6,7,8
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI

                             Date : 17/02/2021
                              ORAL ORDER

Heard learned advocate Mr.Vibhuti Nanavati for the applicant.

This application is filed for condoning the delay of 66 days occurred in filing the First Appeal.

Learned advocate for the applicant has stated the the impugned judgment and award passed on 09.08.2019 for which, certified copy was applied on 14.08.2019, which was ready on 29.08.2019 and the same collected by the advocate on 23.09.2019. He has stated that the relevant claim file was sent through courier on 04.01.2020 to the advocate at Ahmedabad with an instructions to prefer first appeal. He has stated that after receipt of the requisite documents, the advocate instructed and returned the certified copies to the applicant for obtaining appropriate orders for rectification of the typographical error in the cause title of the judgment and award, which was received on 07.01.2020. He has stated that however, the certified copy of the judgment and award forwarded

C/CA/2047/2020 ORDER

somewhere in the month of October, 2019 and that too, the applicant sought explanation from the advocate with respect to the delay in submitting the papers to the Insurance Company. He has stated that after receiving the certified copy of the judgment and award, the matter was immediately sent to the corporate office for appropriate instructions. He has submitted the majority of the papers was in vernacular language and therefore, the same were forwarded for translation. He has submitted that the corporate ofice found that there was glaring eror which was apparent on the ace of the record in holding opponent nos.3 and 4 liable to satisfy the award. He has submitted that the corporate office instructed the applicant to prefer first appeal before the High Court and in the meantime, the appellant arranged to deposit the statutory amount before the learned tribunal. He has submitted that thereafter the advocate forwarded the draft o first appeal, Civil application for condonation of delay and stay was waiting for corrected copy of the judgment and award. Thus, he has stated that the delay of 66 days occurred in filing of the First appeal.

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 requires consideration. It seems that the delay occurred in filing the First Appeal is not intentional or with any mala fide intention.

Accordingly, the delay of 66 days occurred in filing the First Appeal is required to be condoned and the same is hereby condoned. The Civil Application is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute.

(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J) ABHISHEK