Gujarat High Court
Renukaben Harshadbhai Panchal vs Patel Hareshbhai Bhanjibhai on 16 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1907/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1907 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 8854 of 2025
==========================================================
RENUKABEN HARSHADBHAI PANCHAL
Versus
PATEL HARESHBHAI BHANJIBHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
PAULOMEE M MEHTA(8313) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 16/06/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate for the applicant. Ms. Kirti S.
Pathak has appeared on behalf of respondent No.2 -
insurance company.
2. Rule issued by this court upon the rest of the
respondents is awaiting service however noticing the limited
period of delay sought to be condone for in the present
application, the application is taken up for hearing in absence
of the said respondents.
3. The present application is filed under section 5 of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1907/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/06/2025
undefined
Limitation Act read with section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 seeking condonation of delay of 78 days caused in
preferring the appeal. Learned advocate has invited my
attention to the averments made in the application and has
submitted that the impugned judgment and order was
pronounced on 30.09.2024 passed by the Tribunal in a claim
petition preferred by the respondent - original claimants
under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
4. The certified copy of the said judgment and award was
applied for on 01.02.2025 which was received on 05.02.2025.
It was pointed out that noticing the fact that the amount of
compensation was awarded on lower side the applicants have
decided to approach in appeal. The judgment was forwarded
to draft the appeal on 07.02.2025. However in the process,
the delay had crept in.
5. By referring to the aforesaid averments, learned
advocate has submitted that there was no deliberate inaction
or gross negligency on the part of the applicant. Dismissing
the application at the delayed stage would amount to denying
their right to pursue the appeal to present their case for
enhancement. Learned advocate has therefore urged this court
to take liberal view and to condone the delay.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1907/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/06/2025
undefined
6. Learned advocate Ms. Kirti S. Pathak for the
respondent - insurance company has though objected to the
aforesaid submissions however is unable to contradict the
facts stated by the applicant on oath.
7. Considering the aforesaid explanation offered and
considering the fact that the applicants are the claimants
who intend to present their case for enhancement, considering
the benevolent legislation, this court is inclined to exercise its
discretion. The delay caused in preferring the appeal deserves
consideration. Hence, the present application seeking
condonation of delay of 78 days caused in preferring the
appeal is hereby condoned. Rule is made absolute. Application
stands allowed accordingly.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
MAYA
