NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. THAKRI (MST )

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application filed for condonation of delay in filing appeal, CIMA 129 of 1991. The appeal has been filed on 13.11.1991 and it is directed against an award passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Bhaderwah dated 26.7.1991. The appeal is belated by 18 days.

(2.) THE ground taken by the appellant -company is that the company had engaged Mr. Ved Bhushan Gupta Advocate for prosecuting the case before the Tribunal. Said Advocate did not inform the company of the disposal of the matter and passing of the award Tribunal. Appellant company for proving this assertion has placed on record communications made by the Advocate to the Divisional Manager of the company on 15.4.1991 and 14.9.1991. According to the appellant -company they, by virtue of a letter issued to the -advocate, wanted to be abreast of the developments in the case and the advocate, appearing for the company, has omitted to inform them of the award. The case of the company is that same was not negligent in conducting the case and if any negligence has been caused that is attributable to the counsel appearing on its behalf.

(3.) THE respondents here in have strongly contested this application. They have contended that the company did stand informed of the proceedings and it has miserably failed to take care of its case before the Tribunal. As such no sufficient cause is made out for accepting this application and condoning the delay caused in filing the appeal. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. Mr. D. S. Thakur, appearing for the appellant -company, has been meticulous and enthusiastic in bringing home to the court the principle of law laid down by their lordships of the Supreme Court in Nobat Rai Sharma vs Additional District Judge Aurangabad. AIR 1987 SC 1353. I have noticed the principle of law enunciated in this authority.