Madhya Pradesh High Court
Icici Lombard General Insurance ... vs Sunita [Minor[ on 25 January, 2023
Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
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. 767 of 2011
BETWEEN:-
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
THROUGH : MANAGER OFFICE 324 1ST FLOOR KARTAR
NIWAS NAPIER TOWN JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ADITYA NARAYAN-ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SUNITA [MINOR[ D/O CHHATER SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 2 YEARS, OCCUPATION: THROUGH THEIR
MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN PARWATI
BAI VILL JAMGARDH P.S. KHALWA TEH NEW
HARSOOD CHHANERA DISTT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. AJAY S/O CHHATER SINGH OCCUPATION: MINOR
RES. NO.1 & 2 MINOR THRO. MOTHER AND
NATURAL GUR. PARWATI BAI VILL. JAMGARDH
P.S. KHALWA TEH. NEW HARSOOD CHHANERA
DISTT. KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SMT. PARWATI BAI W/O CHHATER SINGH VILL.
JAMGARDH P.S. KHALWA TEH. NEW HARSOOD
CHHANERA DISTT. KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. SMT. BHONI BAI W/O RAMBAKSH VILL.
JAMGARDH P.S. KHALWA TEH. NEW HARSOOD
CHHANERA DISTT. KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5. RAM DAS S/O CHAPMA LAL VILL. LAKHORA P.S.
KHALWA TEH. NEW HARSOOD CHHANERA DISTT.
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: S HUSHMAT
HUSSAIN
Signing time: 1/27/2023
11:04:26 AM
2
(BY SHRI K.S. RAJPUT-ADVOCATE)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Heard on I.A.No.2107/2011, which is an application for condonation of
delay of 260 days in filing of the appeal.
2. Condonation of delay has been sought on the ground that after passing
of the order dated 23.03.2009 by Commissioner for workmen compensation,
the file was sent to the Regional Office of the appellant at Bhopal from where
the payment requests and process of taking approval was carried out and after
getting approval for filing the appeal, statutory deposit was made on 26.06.2009
and the file was sent to the office of the Panel Advocate at Jabalpur for filing of
the appeal.
3. It has further been contended that due to renovation work in the office
of the Panel Advocate, file was misplaced and the appeal could not be filed
within time and when the notice of execution of the award was received in the
office of the appellant then the query was raised regarding status of the appeal
and it was found that the appeal was not filed in the matter and thereafter, the
appeal was filed immediately.
4. Supporting the averments of the application, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that while considering the application under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act, liberal view should be taken and delay should be condoned.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the application and
record.
6. From bare perusal of the application, it appears that the delay has
occurred due to mistake of the counsel, but no affidavit of the concerning
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: S HUSHMAT
HUSSAIN
Signing time: 1/27/2023
11:04:26 AM
counsel has been filed in support of the application. Even otherwise a very
sketchy application has been filed without explaining the delay and even no
reasonable explanation has been offered in the application for condonation of
delay of 260 days in filing the appeal.
7. 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.
8. As such, the application I.A. No. 2107/2011 deserves to be and is hereby
dismissed. Resultantly, the miscellaneous appeal is also dismissed.
9. Interim application(s), if any, shall stand dismissed.
(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE
sh
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: S HUSHMAT
HUSSAIN
Signing time: 1/27/2023
11:04:26 AM
