Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co Ltd vs Chauhan Dineshsinh Pujesinh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3104 Guj

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3104 Guj
Judgement Date : 23 February, 2021

Gujarat High Court

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co Ltd vs Chauhan Dineshsinh Pujesinh on 23 February, 2021

Bench: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati

             C/CA/1380/2020                                          ORDER




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                     R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1380 of 2020

                        In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 8124 of 2020

==========================================================
                   HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
                                 Versus
                      CHAUHAN DINESHSINH PUJESINH
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI

                                  Date : 23/02/2021

                                   ORAL ORDER

1. Heard Mr. Rathin P. Raval, learned advocate for the applicant. Though notice is served, none appears for the respondents.

2. By this application, the applicant has prayed for condonation of delay of 442 days which has occurred in preferring the first appeal.

3. The delay is explained in paragraphs 3 to 10 of the memorandum of application. It is stated that the judgment/award was passed by the learned Tribunal on 12.9.2018. The applicant applied for certified copy on 16.9.2019 which was received on 30.11.2019. It is further stated that the applicant's advocate was unaware of the order passed in the NFL application. He came to know only in

C/CA/1380/2020 ORDER

September, 2019 and hence applied for a copy on 16.9.2019.

4. Going through the contents of the application this Court is of the view that the explanation rendered by the applicant requires consideration as the delay is not intentional, hence the delay is required to be condoned. Accordingly, the delay of 442 days which has occurred in instituting the first appeal is condoned. The application is allowed.

(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J) K.K. SAIYED