Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manilal Shah vs Ram Pratap Kushwaha on 28 February, 2024
Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
ON THE 28 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CIVIL CASE No. 232 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
1. MANILAL SHAH S/O LATE SHRI DEVLAL SHAH,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE CHACHAR,
POLICE STATION MADA, DISTRICT SINGRAULI
(M.P)
2. SMT. LEELAWATI SHAH W/O SHRI MANILAL
SHAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HOUSEWIFE GRAM CHANCHAR THANA MADA
JILA SINGRAULI (M.P)
.....APPLICANTS
(BY SHRI A.P SHAH - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. RAM PRATAP KUSHWAHA S/O DAYARAM
KUSHWAHA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O
BASODA TEHSIL SINGRAULI AB TEHESIL MADA
DISTRICT SINGRAULI (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. MAN PRASAD KUSHWAHA S/O DAYARAM
KUSHWAHA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, NIVASI
BASOUDA TEHSIL SINGRAULI AB TEHSIL MADA
JILA SINGRAULI (M.P)
3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
SURYA BHAWAN VINDHYA NAGAR THANA
VINDHYANAGAR JILA SINGRAULI (M.P)
.....RESPONDENTS
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
Heard on I.A.No.1673/2024, which is an application under Section 5 of
the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing of the MCC/application for
restoration of M.A.No.4766 of 2011.
2. Registry has reported this MCC to be barred by 3561 days.
3. Supporting the averments made in the application under Section 5 of
the Limitation Act, learned counsel submits that against the award passed by
MACT, misc. appeal was filed for enhancement of compensation which was
dismissed due to non compliance of common conditional order dated
11.02.2014.
4. It is contended that after filing of the misc. appeal, several persons
died in the family and the applicants are poor persons, therefore, they could not
pay court fees within the requisite period and now the applicants are ready to
deposit the court fees. With the aforesaid submissions learned counsel submits
that sufficient cause mentioned in the application under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act, should be considered liberally and delay occurred in filing of the
MCC deserves to be condoned.
5. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and perused the record.
6. Against the award passed by MACT somewhere in the year 2011,
misc. appeal was preferred for enhancement of compensation in the year 2011
which was registered as Misc. Appeal No.4766/2011. Before passing common
conditional order on 11.02.2014, sufficient time was given to the applicants to
cure the default of payment of court fees but, neither the applicants nor their
duly engaged counsel took care of orders passed by this Court, and finally the
order was passed on 11.02.2014 giving further four weeks time to cure the
default but that was also not complied with, resultantly vide order of Registrar
J-I dated 16.08.2014, the misc. appeal was dismissed. Further no document has
been placed on record showing weak financial condition of the applicants.
7. In view of the aforesaid, in my considered opinion there is no
sufficient reason for condonation of delay in filing of the MCC. Even otherwise
the application for condonation of delay is very sketchy and does not give any
reasonable explanation of the delay of 3561 days.
8. 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.
9. As such, there being no reasonable or proper explanation of delay of
3561 days in filing of the application for restoration of misc. appeal, the
I.A.No.1673/2024 deserves to be and is hereby dismissed.
10. Resultantly, the MCC is also dismissed.
11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand dismissed.
(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE
SN
