( 1 ) THERE is a delay of 174 days in the filing of this appeal arising out of the award made by the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal in favour of the claimants, who are the legal heirs of the deceased victim of the accident. An application seeking condonation of the delay has been filed, which is supported by an affidavit sworn by the Section Officer of the Law Department of the Government of Karnataka. A reading of the affidavit shows that a certified copy of the judgment and award of the tribunal was forwarded by the Government Pleader to the State Government with his opinion as early as on 4. 5. 2000, which was received by the Law Department on 16. 5. 2000. The opinion and the judgment appear to have been submitted to the solicitor working in the Law Department on 17. 5. 2000. The solicitor in turn returned the file more than a month later on 23. 6. 2000 with a direction that the file pertaining to another motor vehicle case bearing No. 1722 of 1995 should be submitted to him. This file it appears was submitted to the solicitor on 27. 6. 2000. The affidavit goes on to say that the solicitor thereafter reviewed the file and submitted the same on 27. 6. 2000 to the Section Officer. Since there is some confusion in the version set up by the appellant in the affidavit, it will be more appropriate to extract the relevant portion of the same at this stage. It runs thus:"the concerned case worker submitted the same to the solicitor on 17. 5. 2000. The solicitor returned the file with an order to put up the file pertaining to m. V. C. No. 1722 of 1995 on 23. 6. 2000. I further submit that the required file was submitted to the solicitor on 27. 6. 2000 through the Section Officer. The solicitor reviewed the file and submitted to the solicitor on 27. 6. 2000 through the section Officer. The solicitor reviewed the file and submitted the same to the addl. Law Secretary-Ill on 2. 12. 2000. Addl. Law Secretary-Ill received the file on 4. 12. 2000 and took a decision to prefer an appeal against the judgment and award dated 27. 3. 2000. The solicitor returned the file to the Section Officer on 8. 12. 2000 with an order to issue draft government order. The case worker submitted the draft government order on 14. 12. 2000. The draft government order was approved by the solicitor and signed and the same was issued on 14. 12. 2000. Hence, for the above said reasons and for the movement of the file and the case papers from one table to another table, it took sometime for filing the above M. F. A. and the said reasons are bona fide and not intentional or deliberate. "

( 2 ) A plain reading of the above leaves a few questions unanswered. In the first place, the affidavit does not indicate as to why and in what circumstances was the file submitted by one solicitor to another solicitor. Assuming this to be a part of some exercise undertaken by the Department, it is not clear as to how the file reached the Additional Law Secretary-Ill only on 4. 12. 2000. Even assuming that the period spent in processing the file at various levels from the date the judgment and copy of the impugned award was received till 27. 6. 2000 when the solicitor examines the same and submits it to the Additional law Secretary is explained, yet there is no explanation worth the name for the delay between 27. 6. 2000 and 4. 12. 2000 when the Additional Secretary, Law-Ill is said to have received the file. The affidavit, therefore, fails to provide a cogent and satisfactory explanation for the delay in the filing of the appeal.

( 3 ) MR. Ashok Kumar, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the appellant, argued that the delay in the filing of the appeal including the delay of six months between 27. 6. 2000 and 4. 12. 2000 was entirely on account of the pressure of work in the Law Department of the State government. We have no hesitation in rejecting out of hand that explanation. On the date the solicitor had received the file, the period of limitation for filing