M/S Sbi Gen. Insurance Co.Ltd. vs Tipirishetti Amarender
2022 Latest Caselaw 3018 Tel

            HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

                       I.A.N o.2 of 2021 &
                    M.A.C.M.A.No.652 OF 2021

JUDGMENT:

01. This appeal is preferred by the appellant-SBI

General Insurance Company Limited aggrieved by the

order dated 14.03.2016 passed in MVOP No.654 of 2014

by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-III

Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad,

02. I.A.No.2 of 2022 is filed by the petitioner-

appellant seeking to condone the delay of 1370 days in

presenting the appeal.

03. None appears for the appellant.

04. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents-

claimants present. Counter-affidavit has been filed on

behalf of the 1st respondent.

05. Heard learned counsel for the respondents and

perused the counter.

06. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the

application that the Tribunal below passed an ex parte

decree on 14.03.2016. Thereafter, the petitioner-company

has filed applications seeking to set aside the ex parte decree

and to condone the delay. The delay application was

dismissed for default on 10-07-2019 and restoration

petition was returned for want of service of notice. In view

of pandemic, judicial work in the Court below was

suspended and hence, the petitioner could not get the

certified copy of the ex parte decree and judgment. It is

further stated that the respondents-claimants came forward

for out of Court settlement and negotiations were going on

and as such, the delay of 1370 days has occurred.

07. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents,

it is stated that in fact, the delay is more than 1800 days, but

it was wrongly calculated and negotiations were going on

between them. It is further stated that the petitioner has

not properly explained reasons for delay. Much prior to

pandemic, the judgment was pronounced and it was passed

on merits.

08. As can be seen from the judgment passed by the

Tribunal, it appears that respondents 1 and 2 therein were

remained set ex parte. They did not contest in the Tribunal.

Hence, judgment was passed granting compensation to the

respondents-claimants. Aggrieved by the same, the 2nd

respondent-Insurance Company has filed the present appeal

with an inordinate delay of 1370 days and the reasons

stated by it is neither sufficient nor satisfactory to condone

the abnormal delay.

09. Hence, I.A.No.2 of 2021 is dismissed and

consequently, MACMA No.652 of 2021 is also dismissed.

No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall

stand closed.

__________________________ SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

Date: 23.06.2022 rkk