The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of 'sufficient cause' for condoning delay in filing appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

JUDGMENT :

Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.

1. Heard Sri. M. Rahul, Advocate, appearing on behalf of Ms. S. Pranathi, learned Counsel for the Appellant and Sri.Khamhbampati Ramesh Babu, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3/Caveators.

2. The appeal is filed by the ICICI Lombard General Insurance [in short ‘Insurance Company’] under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, [in short ‘M.V. Act’] against the Award, dated 09.10.2019, passed in favor of the claim Petitioners in M.V.O.P. No.591 of 2016 [present Respondent Nos. 1 to 3], passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru [in short ‘the Tribunal’].

3. The Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 filed M.V.O.P. No. 591 of 2016, claiming compensation on account of death of Gadde Prasanna Kumar [‘deceased’] in the accident dated 28.10.2015 caused due to rash and negligent driving of the auto bearing registration No. AP 37 TD 3492 driven by its driver (Respondent No. 4), owned by Respondent No. 5 and insured with the Appellant [Respondent No. 3 in the M.V.O.P.].

4. The Tribunal awarded the claim in terms of its Award, dated 09.10.2019.

5. I.A. No. 1 of 2023 has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

6. The appeal is filed with delay of 1160 days.

7. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the delay occurred due to administrative reasons. In this respect, he has referred to paragraph 3 of the affidavit in support of I.A. No. 1 of 2023.

8. Sri. Khamhbampati Ramesh Babu, Advocate, submits that, the cause for delay as shown in para 3 is not sufficient to condone long delay of 1160 days, which is not liable to be condoned and the application deserves to be rejected.

9. We have considered the submissions advanced and perused the affidavit in support of I.A. No. 1 of 2023.

10. It is appropriate to reproduce paragraph No. 3 of the affidavit, as under:

“3. I submit that the award of the compensation by the tribunal is highly excessive and contrary to the settled principles of law. Hence, aggrieved by the same, the insurance company decided to prefer an appeal against the same. The Hon’ble Tribunal delivered its judgment on 09.10.2019 and our counsel before the tribunal made an application for certified copy on 11.10.2019 and after payment of stamps, it was made ready on 28.10.2019 and delivered on the same day. Thereafter, our counsel took some time for examining the judgment and opined that the compensation awarded is excessive and advised to prefer an appeal. The copies of judgment along with other documents was sent to our local branch office and subsequently they are forwarded to our regional office at Hyderabad.

I further submit that around this period, a nationwide lockdown was announced owing to the outbreak of corona virus and our offices remained shut and the employees operated remotely for almost 2 years i.e., up to March, 2022. The relevant file also could not be traced during the above period and despite the efforts of the company officials, the file could not be traced for several days. Giving a sigh of relief, the file was traced out in the month of July, 2022 and immediately, the concerned official got approvals for preferring an appeal and got issued a pay order no.908446 dated 07.08.2022 for an amount of Rs.25,000/-towards appeal deposit under Section 173(1) of the Act. The same wad deposited to the credit of the Hon’ble Tribunal vide memo filed on 30.08.2022. Thereafter, the original deposit memo was forwarded to our regional office and the matter was entrusted to the counsel empanelled with our company. In the process, an inadvertent delay has been caused in preferring this instant appeal. The delay in filing this appeal is neither willful nor wanton but due to aforesaid reason only. If the delay is not condoned and the appeal is not allowed, the appellant insurance company will be put to severe loss.”

11. As per the aforesaid paragraph, the copy of the judgment, dated 09.10.2019, was applied on 11.10.201