Ajitbhai Nanubhai Chavda vs Jainam Antimbhai Modi
2021 Latest Caselaw 9762 Guj

       C/CA/2257/2020                                 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2021




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                        R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2257 of 2020

                        In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 20708 of 2020

==========================================================
                    AJITBHAI NANUBHAI CHAVDA & 1 other(s)
                                  Versus
                      JAINAM ANTIMBHAI MODI & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PARESH M DARJI(3700) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

                                  Date : 28/07/2021

                                   ORAL ORDER

Though served, none appears for the respondents. Heard learned advocate Mr. Paresh Darji for the applicants.

2. By this application, delay of 441 days is prayed to be condoned. This delay has taken place in preferring the First Appeal challenging the judgment and award of the Claims Tribunal, in which the applicants appellants have claimed enhancement in the amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal.

3. Explaining the delay, it is stated by the applicants that they came to know about delivery of judgment and award by receiving postcard from the clerk of advocate in the month of November, 2018. They wanted to prefer appeal as they were not satisfied with the amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal. It is further stated that the applicants are old aged persons and they lost son in the accident. There was nobody in the family to look after them.

        C/CA/2257/2020                               ORDER DATED: 28/07/2021




3.1     For all these reasons, they could not gather funds to meet with the

litigation expenses of court fees to prefer appeal. Somehow, advocate at High Court level was contacted and the appeal was arranged to be filed. Time elapsed in this process.

4. It cannot be said that the applicants have deliberately whiled away the time. Passage of time could be said to be for bona fide reason. They constitute sufficient cause.

5. At the same time, looking to the length of delay which is of 441 days, it would balance the rights of the parties if the delay is condoned on condition that the applicants - the claimants shall forego interest for the delayed period in the event they succeed in the appeal for enhancement.

6. Resultantly, delay is condoned, with the condition however, that in the event the appellants succeed in the appeal for ehancement, the claimants shall not be entitled to interest thereof for the delayed period of 441 days.

7. This application is allowed and disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute as above.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J) C.M. JOSHI