ORDER

Date : 19-03-2018 Heard Mr. M. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing for the applicants/appellant and also heard Mr. K. K. Bhatta, appearing for the respondent No.2.

2. By this application, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the applicants/appellant have prayed for condonation of delay of 602 days in preferring the appeal against the judgment and award, dated 13.05.2013, passed by the learned Member, MACT, Morigaon in MAC Case No.148/2008, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

3. The case of the applicants/appellant, in a nutshell, is that they are resident of a remote village of Amoni (Misa) in Nagaon District, Assam. The husband of the applicant No.1 died in motor vehicular accident leaving behind his wife, the applicant No.1, one minor son, the applicant No.2 and one minor daughter, aged about 5 years. It has been further contended that the applicant No.1 is a house wife and after the untimely death of her husband, who was the lone bread earner for the family, the applicants have been passing through acute financial crisis. The applicants have also contended that applicant No.1 has been suffering from prolong illness after death of her husband, for which she was under medical treatment from

10.08.2013 to 15.02.2014.

4. According to the applicants, the minor daughter of the appellant No.1, Sabitri Karmakar also died on 01.02.2014, without any proper medical treatment for her illness.

Therefore, under the circumstances, although the local advocate advised them on several occasions for preferring an appeal against the impugned judgment and award, they could not manage to file the appeal within time, due to financial crisis, resulting in unintentional delay of

602 days in filing the appeal. Hence, the instant application for condonation of delay.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 contended that the acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion for the condonation of the delay, but the same has to be satisfactorily accounted for explaining each and every day delay and also that the applicants have raised plausible and reasonable explanation for inability to prefer MAC appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. It has been further contended that the statement given by the applicants is false. Hence, prayed to dismiss the application.

6. On careful scrutiny of the averments made in the application along with the documents annexed thereto and hearing the learned counsel of both the sides, this Court is satisfied that for sufficient cause, the applicants were prevented from preferring the appeal within the prescribed period of Limitation. Therefore, in the backdrop of facts, the delay of 602 days in preffering the appeal against the impugned judgment and award, dated 13.05.2013, passed in MAC Case No.148/2008, by the Member, MACT, Morigaon, Assam is hereby condoned.

7. Resultantly, the Interlocutory Application stands allowed.

Registry to register the appeal.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant