OM PRAKASH & ANOTHER Vs. CHHITAR & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE both these appeals arise out of and pertain to order dated 15.3.2011 rendered by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tonk and relate to one accident, the arguments have been heard together and they are being disposed of by this common order. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that despite having granted numerous adjournments by the learned Tribunal to file the written statement of defence on 10.4.2002, 26.2.2004, 5.7.2004, 23.8.2004 and 4.4.2005, the defendants appellants did not file the same. Resultantly, the learned Tribunal closed the opportunity to file the written statement of defence and passed an ex -parte award in favour of claimant (s) on 29.3.2006 and against the defendants -appellants. The petitioners filed the application under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 CPC for setting -aside the ex -parte award along -with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act after an inordinate delay of 4 years and 9 months i.e. more than 1730 days. The appellants did not disclose any sufficient cause for this inordinate delay.

(2.) IT is relevant to record that the appellants are required to explain each day's delay. The appellants filed the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC after more than 1730 days of the expiry of period of limitation. The appellants did not make any effort to ascertain as to what happened to the case when no information was gathered by them for more than 1730 days. This clearly shows that the appellants were not at all interested in defending the case. Otherwise too, the negligence of the appellants to such a great extent that they did not bother to find out the status of the case for quite a long time now they cannot be permitted to be encouraged by allowing the appeals.

(3.) FOR the reasons stated above, the appeals filed by the appellants fail and the same being bereft of any merit deserve to be dismissed, and thus, they stand dismissed accordingly. Consequent upon the dismissal of appeal, the stay applications filed therewith, do not survive and they also stand dismissed.