Dhannu Lal vs Uttam Prasad
2023 Latest Caselaw 4000 MP

                                                            1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                   BEFORE
                                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                               ON THE 14 th OF MARCH, 2023
                                              MISC. APPEAL No. 3092 of 2018

                          BETWEEN:-
                          1.    DHANNU LAL S/O BANMALI MAHRA, AGED
                                ABOUT 43 YEARS,

                          2.    SMT GUNDI BAI W/O DHANNULAL MAHRA, AGED
                                ABOUT 40 YEARS,
                                BOTH ARE R/O MANERI POLICE CHOWKI
                                M AN ER I P . S . BIJADANDI DISTRICT MANDLA
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....APPELLANTS
                          (BY SHRI D.S. SINGRORE, ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    UTTAM PRASAD S/O B.K.SHRIVASTAVA R/O. AIC-
                                2,SHANTI NAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    MUKESH AGRAWAL S/O      R   C AGRAWAL
                                BALDEVGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD 655 GOL
                                BAZAR JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS


                                This appeal coming on for for admission this day, the court passed the
                          following:
                                                             ORDER

Heard on I.A. No.7609/2018, which is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 2217 days.

This miscellaneous appeal has been preferred for enhancement of Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI RONALD VICTOR Signing time: 3/15/2023 4:50:54 PM

compensation by the claimants challenging the award dated 21/02/2012 passed by 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandla in Claim Case No.16/2010, whereby an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- along with interest has been awarded.

Condonation of delay has been sought on the ground that local counsel assured the appellants that he shall get the appeal filed before the High Court through the counsel of the High Court but later on, it came in the knowledge that the counsel of the High Court had died without filing appeal and this fact could not come in the knowledge of appellants as well as in the knowledge of local counsel and after getting knowledge of the same, they filed the appeal

before the High Court through new counsel. With these submissions, learned counsel for the appellants prays for condonation of delay and submits that the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should be construed liberally and for the mistake of the counsel, the litigants should not be made to suffer.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the application as well as other record.

Bare perusal of the application shows that even the name of local counsel or the counsel of the High Court has not been mentioned and when the counsel was engaged and when he died, has also not been mentioned in the application. The application is very sketchy and does not disclose any reasonable explanation in respect of delay of 2217 days.

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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI RONALD VICTOR Signing time: 3/15/2023 4:50:54 PM

followed recently in the case of Majji Sannemma @ Sanyasirao vs. Reddy Sridevi and Others AIR 2022 SC 332.

As such, the application I.A. No. 7609/2018 deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Resultantly, the miscellaneous appeal is also dismissed.

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

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE RS

Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI RONALD VICTOR Signing time: 3/15/2023 4:50:54 PM