Court can condone delays in filing restoration applications if sufficient cause is shown, allowing cases to proceed on merits.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner herein is the petitioner in OP(MV)

No.1733/2004 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pathanamthitta, and the respondents herein are the respondents therein. The said Original Petition was filed claiming compensation for the personal injuries sustained by the petitioner in an accident on 29.03.2004. The claim petition was dismissed on 06.08.2012 on the ground that there was no representation for the petitioner and no documents were produced. The petitioner filed Ext.P1 application for restoration of the claim petition along with Ext.P2 application to condone the delay of 318 days. The Tribunal found that the petitioner has not shown sufficient reason to condone the delay and dismissed both the applications as per Ext.P3 order.

2. The petitioner states that he had filed the claim petition through Adv. K.Shaj. The said counsel entrusted the case to his junior. However, when the case was called on 06.08.2012, the junior counsel did not represent the matter and the case came to be dismissed by the Tribunal.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company.

4. On going through Ext.P3 order, I find that the reason for dismissal of the claim petition was that, there was no representation from the side of the petitioner when the case was called on 06.08.2012. According to the petitioner, there was no laches or lapses on his part and he was under the bona fide belief that the counsel was conducting the case. Moreover, he was suffering from the personal injuries sustained in the accident. I am of the view that the petitioner has shown sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the petition for restoration of the claim petition and the claim petition has to be adjudicated on merits in accordance with law.

5. Accordingly, I set aside Ext.P3 order and allow Exts.P1 and P2 on condition that the petitioner shall pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- as costs to the counsel for the 2^nd respondent within a period of two weeks from today and the petitioner shall produce a memo to that effect before the Tribunal. It is made clear that the petitioner will not be entitled for interest on compensation while deciding the claim petition for the period from 06.08.2012 till the date of this judgment.

The Original Petition is disposed of as above.