Ramla vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd
2024 Latest Caselaw 33458 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 33458 Ker
Judgement Date : 21 November, 2024

Kerala High Court

Ramla vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd on 21 November, 2024

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
        Thursday, the 21st day of November 2024 / 30th Karthika, 1946
                CM.APPL.NO.1/2024 IN MACA NO. 2822 OF 2024(A)
   OPMV 1644/2012 OF PRINCIPAL MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE
APPLICANTS/APPELLANTS:

  1. RAMLA, AGED 47 YEARS, W/O.LATE MUHAMMED SHAFI, RESIDING AT 2083,
     THOPPAYIL HOUSE, PO. NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE
  2. SHANILA PARVIN, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.LATE MUHAMMED SHAFI, RESIDING AT
     2083, THOPPAYIL HOUSE, PO. NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE
  3. MUHAMMED AKHIL P.T., AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.LATE MUHAMMED SHAFI,
     RESIDING AT 2083, THOPPAYIL HOUSE, PO. NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE
  4. AYISHA FIDA, AGED 19 YEARS, D/O.LATE MUHAMMED SHAFI, RESIDING AT
     2083, THOPPAYIL HOUSE, PO. NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE
  5. SULAIKA, AGED 67 YEARS W/O.BAVA, RESIDING AT P.T HOUSE,
     PALLITHAZHAM, PUTHIYAKADAVU, PO. NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

     NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, DIVISIONAL
     OFFICE, SILVER PLAZA BUILDING, I.G. ROAD, KOZHIKODE.


     Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to condone the delay
of 3964 days in the file in the above appeal.


     This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and the affidavit filed in support thereof, and upon hearing the arguments
of M/S.A.D.DIVYA & SABIN BABU, Advocates for the applicant and of M/S.LAL
K JOSEPH, SURESH SUKUMAR & ANZIL SALIM, Advocate for the respondent, the
Court passed the following:




                                                                     P.T.O
                     SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, J.
            ------------------------------------------------------------
                        C.M.Appl. No. 1 of 2024
                                         in
                        MACA No. 2822 of 2024
            ------------------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 21st day of November, 2024


                                    ORDER

This is an application to condone the delay of 3964 days

in filing the appeal.

2. It is seen that the impugned award was passed on

25.06.2013; certified copy was applied on 18.05.2024; stamp

paper was called on 23.05.2024, which was produced on

27.05.2024; the copy was ready on 05.06.2024; the date fixed

for appearance for receiving it was on 15.06.2024; and the

copy was delivered on 10.06.2024.

3. The appeal ought to have been filed on or before

23.09.2013. In the affidavit filed in support of the application

to condone the delay, it is stated that the first applicant, the

wife of the deceased, was under mental depression following

the death of her husband. It is further stated that her children

were minors at the time of the accident and the mother-in-law

was taking care of the children when she was under

depression. Due to the old age, her mother-in-law could not

contact the counsel or enquire regarding the filing of the

..2..

appeal. Now, the children have become major and after

getting some relief from the depression, the first applicant

approached the counsel concerned for filing the appeal and

thus, the delay of 3964 days occurred.

4. The respondent insurer filed a counter affidavit,

contending that no sufficient cause has been stated for

condoning the long delay of 3964 days. It is further contended

that the impugned award was passed on 25.06.2013 and there

was a period of more than five years prior to the COVID-19

pandemic and even then, no appeal was filed. To substantiate

the contentions, they relied on the judgments in Sheo Raj

Singh (Deceased) through LRs & others v. Union of India (UOI)

& others [MANU/SC/1098/2023], Basawaraj & others v. The

Special Land Acquisition Officer [(2013) 14 SCC 81], Brijesh

Kumar v. State of Haryana [(2014) 11 SCC 351] and Musthafa

v. Nazeera Beegum [2020 (6) KLT 63]. According to the

respondent insurer, the affidavit in support of the application

has been prepared in a haphazard manner without explaining

proper reasons; and hence, they prayed for a dismissal of the

application.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the

..3..

applicants/appellants as well as the learned Standing Counsel

for the respondent insurer.

6. The claim petition was filed in the year 2012 and

the award was passed on 25.06.2013. It is stated in the

affidavit that due to the death of her husband, the first

applicant was under depression and was undergoing

treatment, however, no documents are produced to prove the

same. It may be true that there may not be documents to

prove the condition of the first applicant, who was under

depression. Depression is a state of mind characterized by

persistent feeling of sadness, hopelessness and loss of interest

in activities. It is a prolonged sadness or emptiness in the life

of a person. It is a fact that the deceased was aged 35 years at

the time of the accident and he succumbed to the injuries

leaving behind his wife, three minor children aged 13, 11 and

7 years respectively and the mother. Other than depression,

no reasons have been sated in the affidavit for condoning the

long delay. On a perusal of the impugned award, it is seen that

the applicants/appellants/claimants were not awarded a just

and reasonable compensation. The accident is an unforeseen

and unfortunate event. The deceased was the only

..4..

breadwinner of the family. Though the affidavit does not

properly explain the delay, the Motor Vehicles Act being a

welfare legislation, considering the facts of the present case, I

am inclined to condone the delay of 3964 days in filing the

appeal, however, on payment of costs.