Gujarat High Court
Jitendrakumar Kanaiyalal Anadkat vs Pravinbhai Ravjibhai Vaghasiya on 11 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1484/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.
1484 of 2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2343 of 2025
=============================================
JITENDRAKUMAR KANAIYALAL ANADKAT
Versus
PRAVINBHAI RAVJIBHAI VAGHASIYA & ANR.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 11/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Hemal Shah for the
applicant. Ms. Kirti Pathak, learned advocate has entered her
appearance on behalf of respondent no.2. Notice issued by
this Court upon the respondent no.1 has been duly served,
however chosen not to appear.
2. The present application is filed under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 234 days
caused in preferring the appeal at the instance of the original
claimant.
3. It is submitted that though the impugned judgment and
award was pronounced on 20.03.2024, the advocate has
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1484/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
applied for certified copy on 09.05.2024, which was made
available on 13.5.2024. It is also submitted that the applicant
was not aware about the legal intricacies involved in order to
pursue the remedy of appeal to seek enhancement of the
amount of compensation has taken financial help from his
friends and family. The learned advocate has urged this Court
to take liberal approach and to condone the delay. It was
submitted that there was no willful negligence or gross
inaction on the part of the applicant and they may be given a
fair chance to present his case for enhancement of amount of
compensation.
4. Learned advocate Ms. Kirti Pathak for the respondent
Insurance Company has vehemently objected to aforesaid
submission of learned advocate for the applicant- original
claimant. At outset, learned advocate has submitted that there
is inordinate, unexplained and unjustified huge delay which is
required to be not entertained.
5. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned
advocate for the applicant, in light of the averments made in
the application and considering the benevolent scheme of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1484/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
Act, this Court is inclined to exercise its discretion and to
condone the delay. The main object of the Act is to extend the
just and reasonable compensation in a motor vehicle accident,
not entertaining the appeal on the technical issue of delay,
would take away their remedy to present their case for
enhancement of amount of compensation. Hence, delay of 234
days caused in preferring restoration application of the main
appeal is hereby condoned. Present application stands
disposed of.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH
