The court emphasized that mere procedural inefficiencies do not justify the condonation of significant delays in filing appeals.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

1. Heard Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the appellant.

2. I.A. No. 11338 of 2024 has been filed for condonation of delay of 434 days in filing the present appeal.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-insurance company submits that the said delay has occurred due to moving the file from one table to another table, as such, the said delay has occurred and in view of that the aforesaid delay may kindly be condoned.

4. This appeal has been preferred against the award dated 22.12.2022, passed by the District Judge-IV-cum-Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bokaro, in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 35 of 2018, whereby, an award of a sum of Rs. 7,25,200/- with simple interest @ 7.5 per annum has been allowed.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that on the ground of contributory negligence, the appeal may kindly be allowed. He submits that driving license was the another issue, which has wrongly been decided by the learned Tribunal and the income has not been decided in accordance with law. On these grounds, he submits that the tribunal award is not based on the facts, as such, this appeal may kindly be admitted.

6. It transpires that the claimants have filed the compensation case claiming for an amount of Rs. 17,01,000/- on the background that on 15.07.2017, in the evening, the informant’s husband Ranjeet Goshwami was returning his house after working from the shop of Binod Turi at Marajori, near Petrol Pump, in the meantime, at about 7.15 P.M. Sanjeev Gorain dashed him by his motorcycle bearing registration number JH-09-AB-4048 by rash and negligent driving from the opposite direction, due to which, her husband died on spot and pursuant to that Chandankiyari (Barmasia) P.S. Case No. 84 of 2017 was registered and chargesheet was submitted against the driver Sanjeev Gorain.

7. It further transpires that the learned court has framed altogether 9 issues to decide the said claim. Issue No. 5 was with regard to rash and negligent driving and issue No. 6 was about the valid driving license. Witnesses have supported the case of the claimants, which has not been rebutted and demolished by the insurance company, in view of that issue with regard to rash and negligent driving was not demolished by the insurance company. The vehicle was insured and that has also been proved, which has been admitted by defendant No. 3, which is the insurance company. In view the chargesheet, the negligence found to be there against the driver, who is Sanjeev Gorain. As such, the negligence has not been proved so far as the deceased is concerned and the negligence is proved against another motorcycle. The monthly income of the deceased was claimed to be Rs. 9,000/- per month, as he was a cook in a hotel, however, no document was filed, as such, the learned Tribunal has calculated the income in view of the Jharkhand Government Rules, 2017 and treated him as unskilled labour and held that his income was Rs. 5460/-. Thus, on income also, the learned tribunal has taken a very lenient view.

8. So far as the driving license is concerned, the insurance company has not able to prove before the learned tribunal that it was not valid and the is duty caste upon the insurance company to prove the same, if such plea was taken, as such, on that point also, insurance company has failed.

9. In view of the above, it transpires that all the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant in the present appeal to admit the same, has rightly been answered by the learned tribunal. On merit also, the appellant-insurance company has not been able to satisfy the court.

10. Further the only ground taken in the limitation petition for condoning the delay is due to movement of the file from one table to another table and the delay is said to be 434 days. The appellant is a company and having all the facilities like internet, email, fax in spite of that such delay has occurr