Pravinsinh Govindsinh Chudasma vs Lh Of Rameshbhai Lakhabhai Rathod
2021 Latest Caselaw 16610 Guj

     C/CA/3107/2019                                     ORDER DATED: 22/10/2021




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3107 of 2019

                      In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 27242 of 2019

==========================================================
                   PRAVINSINH GOVINDSINH CHUDASMA
                                Versus
                  LH OF RAMESHBHAI LAKHABHAI RATHOD
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KUNAL S SHAH(5282) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR H M SHAH(3997) for the Respondent(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.6
RULE NOT RECD BACK(63) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,1.5
RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE

                                Date : 22/10/2021

                                   ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned advocate for the claimants.

2. There is no appearance on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, though served.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant tenders affidavit dated 18.10.2021 to further explain the delay in compliance of the order dated 8.10.2021 which is taken on record.

4. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that in all five claim petitions, including claim petition which is subject matter of the impugned judgment and award

C/CA/3107/2019 ORDER DATED: 22/10/2021

were preferred in the Tribunal in respect of the selfsame accident. He submits that the claim petition which is subject matter of present appeal was decided earlier wherein insurance company is exonerated. However, in the claim petitions which are decided subsequently, the Tribunal has fasten liability on the insurance company. It is his further submission that the insurance company- respondent No.3 has preferred four Appeals i.e. First Appeal Nos. 3769 to 3772 of 2019 in this Court which are admitted. He, therefore, urges that the delay may be condoned.

5. Mr. H.M. Shah, learned advocate for the claimants submits that appropriate order may be passed.

6. Having heard learned advocate for the contesting parties and considering the fact that in the subsequent judgment and award in respect of the selfsame accident, the Tribunal has held insurance company liable to pay compensation and the appeals at the instance of the insurance company has already been admitted by this Court, I am of the view that the applicant has made out cause for condonation of delay though, delay is very huge. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned. The application stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute.

(A.G.URAIZEE, J) SURESH SOLANKI