PIRI ORAIN Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the liability to pay compensation has been fastened on the respondent insurance company and therefore, appearance of respondent No.2, who happens to be owner of the vehicle, is not very much essential.

(2.) In view of the submissions, appearance of respondent No.2 is waived.

(3.) I.A. No.140 of 2010 has been filed u/s 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 36 days in presenting the appeal against the judgment and award dated 23rd January, 2009 passed by the M.V.A.C.T. Ranchi in connection with Compensation Case No.278 of 2002.