OMPAL AND ANR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for applicants-appellants and perused the record.

(2.) This appeal under Section 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 has been filed after expiry of period of limitation with a delay of one year and 13 days.

(3.) The explanation furnished in affidavit accompanying delay condonation application filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1963") is that counsel for appellants before Court below has instructed to file appeal before this Court whereafter he contacted counsel in January, 2017 who required some papers but then appellants took considerable time. No detail has been given as to what ailment appellants suffer and why it was not possible to file appeal within reasonable time. Moreso, affidavit has been filed by pairokar of appellants and not by appellants. The explanation appears to be superficial and afterthought. In our view, there is no explanation what to say of satisfactory explanation as to why the matter was not taken with due earnest and reasonable expediency.