S. C. MOHAPATRA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal has been preferred by the appellant which is an insurer of motor vehicles.

( 2 ) BEING aggrieved by the award of the Second Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Northern Division, Sambalpur dated 17-12-1983, this appeal has been filed on 18-6-1984. Along with the memorandum of appeal, an application under S. 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal. The Stamp Reporter of the Court on calculation, after taking into consideration the period taken for obtaining the certified copy of the judgment of the tribunal, has pointed out the last date for preferring the appeal to be 26-3-1984. The appeal was preferred on 18-6-1984 which was the reopening date of this Court after Summer Vacation. The Court closed for Summer Vacation on 11-5-1984.

( 3 ) UNDER S. 5 of the Limitation Act sufficient cause is to be shown explaining the delay of each day. It is not of course possible to lay down precisely as to what matters would constitute sufficient cause. It can, however, be clarified that the delay in filing an appeal should not have been for reasons indicating negligence in not taking necessary steps. What would b