Oriental Insurance Company ... vs Solanki Sitaben W/O Kodarsinh ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 15495 Guj

      C/CA/4474/2019                                   ORDER DATED: 04/10/2021




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                       R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4474 of 2019
                        In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 34029 of 2019
==========================================================
                 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
                                Versus
               SOLANKI SITABEN W/O KODARSINH AMARSINH
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS KARUNA V RAHEVAR(3818) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR GC MAZMUDAR(1193) for the Respondent(s) No. 8
MR HG MAZMUDAR(1194) for the Respondent(s) No. 8
MR TEJAS P SATTA(3149) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 6,7
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

                              Date : 04/10/2021

                                  ORAL ORDER

Heard learned advocate Ms.Karuna Rahevar for the applicant, learned advocate Mr.Tejas Satta for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and learned advocate Mr.G.C. Mazmudar for respondent No.8. Rule is served on respondent Nos.6 and 7, however none appears.

2. This application is preferred by the insurance company for condonation of delay of 99 days.

3. This delay has caused in preferring the First Appeal against judgment and award dated 25th March, 2019 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.358 of 2007.

3.1 Explaining the passage of time, it is stated that certified copy was immediately applied on 27th March, 2019 which was received on 10th April, 2019.

C/CA/4474/2019 ORDER DATED: 04/10/2021

Thereafter file was moved for the purpose of seeking legal opinion. The file was received at the Ahmedabad office on 25th June, 2019. The papers were thereafter rooted through the Regional Office and the opinion of the advocate of the High Court level was obtained. The advocate informed by letter dated 18th September, 2019. Thereafter appeal came to be preferred. This resulted into delay of 99 days beyond the period of limitation.

4. The passage of time leading to delay is due to the administrative procedure required to be undertaken by the applicant-insurance company. The file was rooted through Ahmedabad office and thereafter Regional office, and legal opinion was solicited. Negligence or intentional whiling away of time is not possible to be attributed at any stage of the process. Sufficient cause is made out. Delay deserves to be condoned.

5. Resultantly, delay of 99 days is condoned. Application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J) ANUP