The New India Insurance Company ... vs Seema Husain
2023 Latest Caselaw 1470 MP

                                                         1
                             IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                             ON THE 25 th OF JANUARY, 2023
                                              MISC. APPEAL No. 4687 of 2009

                            BETWEEN:-
                            THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
                            THROUGH : DIVISIONAL MANAGER DIFIXIONAL
                            OFFICE PARYAVAS BHAVAN ARERA HILLS JAIL
                            PAHADI BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                  .....APPELLANT
                            (BY SHRI DINESH KOSHAL, ADVOCATE)

                            AND
                            1.    SEEMA HUSAIN W/O LATE AKHTAR HUSAIN,
                                  AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, H.NO. 3479 NOORANI
                                  MASJID   KE    PASS    NAIYA      BASERA
                                  KOTRASULTANABAD     BHOPAL      (MADHYA
                                  PRADESH)

                            2.    LIYAKAT HUSSAIN S/O FIDA HUSSAIN, AGED
                                  ABOUT 70 YEARS, H.NO. 3479 NOORANI MASJID
                                  KE PASS NAIYA BASERA KOTRASUTANABAD
                                  BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                            3.    SAHJAD D/O LIYAKAT HUSSAIN, AGED ABOUT 60
                                  YEARS, H.NO. 3479 NOORANI MASJID KE PASS
                                  NAIYA BASERA KOTRASUTANABAD BHOPAL
                                  (MADHYA PRADESH)

                            4.    SUNIL S/O KANCHEDI LAL OCCUPATION: THR.
                                  DEVI SINGH H.NO. 112 GALI NO.2 BARKHEDI ASH
                                  BAG ROAD DISTT. BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                            5.    DEVI SINGH S/O KANCHEDI LAL GALI NO.2
                                  BARKHEDI ASH BAG ROAD BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                  PRADESH)

                                                                                .....RESPONDENTS


Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUMARI PALLAVI
SINHA
Signing time: 1/27/2023
11:18:17 AM
                                                                2
                                  T h is appeal coming on for order this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                            following:
                                                                ORDER

Heard on I.A. No. 1211/2010, which is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 637 days.

2. Condonation of delay has been sought on the ground that after passing of the award dated 25.01.2008 and after obtaining the opinion from the local counsel vide its letter dated 05.02.2008, Senior Manager vide its letter dated 11.02.2008 sought permission to file the appeal from legal department, which was granted on 21.02.2008 and thereafter on 11.03.2008 the file was sent

to Divisional Office, Jabalpur to file the appeal. It is further contended in the application that the concerning office was under impression that the appeal might have been filed and pending in the High Court but upon receiving the information on 18.11.2009 regarding execution for recovery of the awarded amount, the concerning office was surprised and shocked and then they enquired and came to know that the appeal has not been filed in the High Court. Accordingly, the delay has been prayed to be condoned.

3. Supporting the aforesaid averments, learned counsel for the appellant submits that while considering the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act liberal view should be adopted and delay should be condoned.

4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.

5. In the entire application, nothing has been mentioned about taking of action against the erring person, who was responsible to file the appeal against the impugned award. It is also apparent from the record that the appellant has been negligent in prosecuting the case/appeal. Accordingly, in my opinion, there is no sufficient ground for condonation of long delay of 637 days in filing of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: KUMARI PALLAVI SINHA Signing time: 1/27/2023 11:18:17 AM

appeal.

6. The Supreme Court in the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project and another (2008) 17 SCC 448 has observed that the Court cannot enquire into belated and stale claims on the ground of equity. Delay defeats equity. The Courts help those who are vigilant and "do not slumber over their rights". The aforesaid judgment has further been followed recently in the case of Majji Sannemma @ Sanyasirao vs. Reddy Sridevi and Others AIR 2022 SC 332.

7. As such, the I.A. No. 1211/2010 deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Resultantly, the miscellaneous appeal is also dismissed.

8. Interim application(s), if any, shall stand dismissed.

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE Pallavi

Signature Not Verified Signed by: KUMARI PALLAVI SINHA Signing time: 1/27/2023 11:18:17 AM