Gujarat High Court
Bhagwatiben Nareshkumar Joshi vs Driver And Owner Of The Vehicle St Bus No ... on 26 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4874/2024 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 4874 of
2024
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 23805 of 2024
==========================================================
BHAGWATIBEN NARESHKUMAR JOSHI & ORS.
Versus
DRIVER AND OWNER OF THE VEHICLE ST BUS NO GJ 18 V 3381 (DELETED)
& ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. PRAKASH K DESAI(15513) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR.DIPEN F CHAUDHARI(6740) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR TANMAY B KARIA(6833) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
MS SEJAL K MANDAVIA(436) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 26/06/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Harshal Patel for Mr. Dipen F.
Chaudhari, learned advocate on record for the applicants-original
claimants. Learned advocate Ms. Sejal K. Mandavia has entered her
appearance on behalf of respondent no.2 and learned advocate Mr.
Tanmay Karia has appeared on behalf of respondent no.4.
2. Notice issued by this Court upon respondent no.3, has been duly
served; however, no appearance has been entered.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4874/2024 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
3. The present application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation
Act read with Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking
condonation of delay of 468 days caused in preferring the appeal.
4. Learned advocate for the applicants has referred to the
averments made in the application, and has submitted that the
impugned judgment and award was pronounced on 01.02.2023. The
certified copy of the same was applied for on 04.10.2023 and the same
was made available on 25.10.2023. However, the appeal could be filed
on 12.08.2024. While referring to the aforesaid dates, learned
advocate has submitted that the applicant no.1 is the widow of the
deceased, and the mother of the applicant nos.2 and 3, who were
minor at the time of the accident. He has further contended that she
is mainly earning her livelihood by doing housekeeping, and there is no
bread winner in her family. She is, therefore, facing financial
difficulties, therefore, the time was consumed to meet with the legal
expenses to pursue the appeal. Learned advocate has further pointed
out that the time was also consumed in engaging the lawyer in High
Court and to seek appropriate advise for filing the appeal, and to
provide the documents. By referring to the aforesaid explanation
offered, learned advocate has submitted that the applicants are the
original claimants, who intend to present their case in appeal for
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4874/2024 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
enhancement. He has, therefore, submitted that liberal view may be
taken and delay may be condoned, subject to condition of waiver of
interest for the interregnum period of delay.
5. Learned advocates appearing for the respective respondents
have objected to the aforesaid submissions of learned advocate for
the applicants; however, learned advocates have left it to the Court to
pass appropriate orders, subject to condition, as agreed by the original
claimants.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned advocates for
the respective parties and considering the explanation offered as well
as noticing the fact that the applicant are the original claimants, who
intend to present their appeal for enhancement of amount of
compensation, taking liberal view, this Court is inclined to accept the
explanation offered to be sufficient cause, which, prevented them to
approach in appeal within stipulated period of limitation. However,
noting the huge number of delay involved, in order to strike out the
balance, the delay of 468 days caused in preferring the appeal, is
condoned, subject to waiver of interest for the interregnum period of
delay. The original claimants are, thus, not entitled to the interest for
the interregnum period of delay, if in case, they succeed in appeal.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4874/2024 ORDER DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
7. With these observations, the delay of 468 days caused in
preferring the appeal, is condoned. The Civil Application is allowed,
and stands disposed of.
8. Registry is directed to reflect the name of learned advocates
appearing for the respective respondents in the main appeal as well.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
SUYASH SRIVASTAVA
