Sampoornamma vs A.Krishnamurthy
2022 Latest Caselaw 9893 Mad

                                                  C.M.P.No.9885 of 2017 and C.M.A.SR.59396 of 2014

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED: 13.06.2022

                                                     CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
                                                   and
                                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

                                            C.M.P.No.9885 of 2017 and
                                            C.M.A.SR.No.59396 of 2014


                  1.Sampoornamma
                  2.B.Dhinesh Kumar (Minor)
                  3.B.Divya (Minor)
                  4.B.Kistamma
                  (Petitioners 2 and 3 rep. by their mother
                  and next friend Sampoornamma
                  1st petitioner)                                              ... Petitioners

                                                       Vs.

                  1.A.Krishnamurthy
                  (R1 already set exparte in lower Court
                  and hence, notice to R1 is dispensed with)

                  2.The United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
                  Motor III Party Claims Office
                  No.38, Anna salai
                  Chennai-2.                                                   ... Respondents

                  1/5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                     C.M.P.No.9885 of 2017 and C.M.A.SR.59396 of 2014

                             PRAYER: C.M.P.No.9885 of 2017 is filed under Section 173 (1) of the
                  Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to condone the delay of 3005 days in filing the
                  above appeal.


                             C.M.A.SR.No.59396 of 2014 is filed under Section 173 of the Motor
                  Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 20.12.2005 made
                  in M.C.O.P.No.122 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
                  Tribunal, Additional District and Sessions Court, (III Fast Track Court),
                  Poonamallee.


                                         For Petitioners    : Ms.S.Ramya

                                                           for Mr.J.Mahalingam

                                         For R2            : Mr.P.Sankaranarayanan

                                                       ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by V.M.VELUMANI,J.)

C.M.P.No.9885 of 2017 is filed to condone the delay of 3005 days in

filing the above appeal.

C.M.A.SR.No.59396 of 2014 is filed against the judgment and decree

dated 20.12.2005 made in M.C.O.P.No.122 of 2004 on the file of the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District and Sessions Court, (III Fast

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.No.9885 of 2017 and C.M.A.SR.59396 of 2014

Track Court), Poonamallee.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the

learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and perused the materials

available on record.

3.According to the petitioners, award was passed on 20.12.2005 and

their counsel informed them to file an appeal. Due to sudden demise of

husband of the 1st petitioner, the petitioners were under mental agony and

were sick with a resigned mood, their entire life has been shattered and

hence, the delay of 3005 days has occurred in filing the appeal and has come

out with present petition.

4.From the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of this

petition, it is seen that the petitioners have not furnished any details as to

when their counsel contacted them and instructed them to file appeal. The

petitioners have not given any acceptable reason for condoning the huge

delay of 3005 days in filing the appeal. It is well settled that the length of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.No.9885 of 2017 and C.M.A.SR.59396 of 2014

delay is not a criteria, but intention of the parties must be bonafide and should

not cause any prejudice to other side.

5.In the present case, after lapse of 3005 days after the award, it will be

very difficult for the respondents to collect necessary documents to defend

the appeal. For the above reasons, C.M.P.No.9885 of 2017 stands dismissed

as the petitioners have not given any acceptable and valid reason for

condoning the huge delay of 3005 days. Consequently, C.M.A.SR.No.59396

of 2014 is rejected. No costs.

(V.M.V., J) (S.S., J) 13.06.2022

kj

To

1.The Additional District and Sessions Judge Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III Fast Track Court), Poonamallee.

2.The Section Officer VR Section High Court, Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.No.9885 of 2017 and C.M.A.SR.59396 of 2014

V.M.VELUMANI,J.

and S.SOUNTHAR,J.

kj

C.M.P.No.9885 of 2017 and C.M.A.SR.No.59396 of 2014

13.06.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis