SHANKARBHAI NANJIBHAI DAMOR Vs. GAURAVBHAI NAVINCHANDRA NAVADIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 437 days which has occurred in preferring the captioned First Appeal.

(2.) Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the impugned order was pronounced on 4/10/2018. The claimants were thereafter informed by the advocate of the tribunal that the impugned award has been passed and the copy of the award was accordingly tendered to the claimants. The applicants are coming from poor background and are not well aware about the legal course of action. The applicants herein were not informed that the impugned award can be challenged before the High Court and whether the enhanced amount can be awarded to the applicants as per various judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Later on, applicants made inquiry and sought legal opinion in order to know the legal course of action. The applicants also belong to poor class of society and are therefore facing financial constraints which further stopped the applicants from taking any action immediately. The applicants thereafter contacted another advocate and sought for his legal advice for further line of action and the applicants were informed that the said award and judgment is required to be challenged in the High Court of Gujarat seeking enhancement. The applicants having financial constraint remained hesitant, and in the meantime Covid - 19 Pandemic and the resultant lockdown further stalled the process of pursuing the matter, and therefore, the applicants could not approach the advocate in High Court of Gujarat. The applicants thereafter approached the advocate with some of the papers. The applicant's phone number changed in the meanwhile and the advocate was unable to reach the applicants. Upon the applicants getting in touch again the applicants were advised to obtain the missing documents. The applicants thereafter obtained all the relevant papers and supplied the same in the month of December, 2021, for filing of appeal. The advocate thereafter took some time to prepare the draft of First Appeal and the application of condonation of delay.

(3.) Considering the submissions made and in view of the averments made in para 4 and 5 of the application and also considering the fact that the delay has been sufficiently explained; this Court is of the opinion that the delay caused in preferring the First Appeal deserves to be condoned.