IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
K. Subramani – Appellant
Versus
M. Thangavel & Another – Respondents
CMP No. 17254 of 2022 & CMA Sr. No. 105388 of 2022
Decided On : 08-03-2023
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Delay in Filing Appeal - Court dismisses the petition to condone the delay of 1525 days in filing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the decree and judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
Fact of the Case:
The claimant filed a claim petition for compensation for injuries sustained in a road transport accident. The tribunal awarded compensation, but the claimant appealed with a delay of 1525 days.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no valid reason or sufficient cause to condone the delay of 1525 days and dismissed the Civil Miscellaneous Petition. Consequently, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was rejected at the SR stage.
Issues: Delay in filing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, sufficiency of cause to condone the delay.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that in the absence of any positive averments to establish sufficient cause, the delay of 1525 days could not be condoned.
Final Decision: The Civil Miscellaneous Petition was dismissed, and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was rejected at the SR stage.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer in CMP No.17254 of 2022: This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 praying to condone the delay of 1525 days in filing the CMA Sr.No.105388 of 2022.
In CMA Sr.No.105388 of 2022 : This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the decree and judgment dated 07.02.2018 made in MCOP No.2011 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal [Special Sub Court No.II], Salem.)
Common Order:
1. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is to condone the delay of 1525 days in preferring the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, against the decree and judgment dated 07.02.2018 made in MCOP No.2011 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal [Special Sub Court No.II], Salem.
2. The claim petitioner filed the above claim petition before claims tribunal, claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the road transport accident on 05.12.2014. Before the tribunal, to substantiate his claim, during the trial, he has examined PW1 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P9. The Disability certificate issued by the Medical Board is marked as Ex.C1.
3. Based upon Ex.C1, 38% disability was assessed and the date of the accident being 2014, Rs.3,000/- per % of disability was granted. The claims tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,24,191/-, under various heads.
4. Having not satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the injured claim petitioner has preferred the appeal with a delay of 1525 days.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the records.
6. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent-Insurance company could contend that the Award in MCOP No.2011 of 2016 was passed on 07.02.2018. The award amount was deposited on 24.08.2018 and the entire award amount has been withdrawn by the claimant.
7. After going through the affidavit, except stating bald averments, I find no valid reason much less sufficient cause to condone the huge delay of 1525 days. Further, the entire award amount has already been withdrawn in the year 2018 itself and the case has been filed subsequently only in the year 2022.
8. Therefore, in the absence of any positive averments to suit as sufficient cause, this Court is not inclined to condone the delay. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands rejected, at the SR stage itself. No Costs.
The court emphasized the importance of establishing sufficient cause to condone a delay in filing an appeal.
The court emphasized the importance of establishing a valid reason or sufficient cause to condone a significant delay in filing an appeal.
An inordinate delay, such as 938 days, in filing an appeal cannot be condoned based on vague justifications like 'administrative reasons' as it fails to establish 'sufficient cause' under the law.
A petition for condonation of delay was dismissed as withdrawn based on the petitioner's request.
The strict liability imposed on the owner of a motor vehicle causing death or permanent disablement under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, applies despite contrary provisions in the Act ....
Non-appearance of parties at hearing leads to dismissal of delay condonation petition and rejection of related appeal at SR stage.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.