ORDER :

Nelson Sailo, J.

1. Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Dutta for the applicants. Also heard Mr. A. Mannaf, learned counsel for the respondent claimants.

2. This order will dispose of all the three Interlocutory Applications. Although the number of days delay are not similar in all the three applications, but since the explanations for the delay being similar, they are taken up together for disposal.

3. For the sake of convenience and for brevity, I.A.(C) No. 1023/2018 shall be referred to. The application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of 439 days delay in filing the appeal against the Judgment & Order dated 24.06.2015 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 1, Kamrup, Guwahati in MAC Case No. 553/2010.

4. The learned senior counsel, Mr. S. Dutta submits that the reason for filing the appeal beyond the period of limitation was only due to the various process necessary to be undertaken by the Insurance Company in finalizing the decision to file an appeal, which included consultations between the Branch Office, Divisional Office and the Regional Office of the Insurance Company. In support of his submission, the learned counsel refers to paragraph No. 7 of the application in particular. The learned senior counsel further submits that the applicant has good ground of appeal and there is a substantial question of law involved, which requires the consideration of this Court and therefore, unless the delay is condoned, grave prejudice will be caused to the applicant in support of his submission, the learned senior counsel relies upon the following authorities:-

(i) Smt. Sandhya Rani Sarkar Vs. Smt. Sudha Rani Debi & Ors., reported in (1978) 2 SCC 116

(ii) State of Nagaland Vs. Lipok Ao & Ors., reported in (2005) 3 SCC 752

(iii) National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Cholleti Bharatamma & Ors., reported in (2008) 1 SCC 423.

5. Mr. A. Mannaf, the learned senior counsel for the respondent claimants, on the other hand, submits that the applicant has not satisfactorily explained the delay in filing the appeal. By referring to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent claimants on 16.08.2018, the learned counsel submits that the applicant Insurance Company filed the appeal on 05.12.2016 against the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal on 24.06.2015. By the time the appeal was filed, there was already 440 days delay. He also submits that the appeal was also filed without a certified copy of the judgment and award of the Tribunal and therefore, a defect was remarked by the filing section of the Registry of this Court The respondent claimants, on the other hand, were all along waiting for the judgment and award to be satisfied by the applicant Insurance Company but since the same was not deposited within the time specified by the Tribunal, the respondent claimants initiated Bakijai proceeding being B.J. Case No. 53/2017 on 25.5.2017 before the Certificate Officer, Bakijai Branch, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati. On filing the Bakijai case, a warrant of arrest was issued vide Order dated 04.10.2017. It was only then that the applicant took steps to rectify the defect in the appeal that was filed on 05.12.2016 by submitting an application for permission to rely upon the original certified copy filed in respect of the other two analogous appeals. Such application was filed on 16.02.2018 and pursuant to which, the defect was rectified on 17.02.2018. The learned counsel submits that it cannot therefore be said that the applicant was not diligent in pursuing the appeal within the period of limitation as prescribed by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 i.e., 90 days from the date of the judgment and award of the Tribunal. Mr. A. Mannaf in support of his submission relies upon the following decisions:-

(i) Office of the Chief Post Master General & Ors. Vs. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr., reported in 2012 (3) SCC 563

(ii) Order dated 17.07.2017 passed by this Court in