Hiramati v. Prabhat Kumar Yadav

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MAC No. 1017 of 2016

1. Hiramati S/o Late Santanu Kumar @ Santram, Aged About 23 Years

2. Minor Mohnish Kumar, S/o Santanu Kumar @ Santram, Aged About 3 Years

3. Minor Garima Kumari, D/o Santanu Kumar @ Santram, Aged About 7 Month,

4. Both Minor Through Legal Guardian Hiramati, W/o Santanu Kumar @ Santram, Aged About 23 Years,

4. Daduram, S/o Gandhiram, Aged About 42 Years

5. Bhuribai, W/o Daduram, Aged About 40 Years

6. All the caste Kevat, All R/o- Village- Darra, Kasdol, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Now The District- Baloda-Bazar, Bhatapara, (Chhattisgarh),.....(Claimant) ---- Appellants

Versus

1. Prabhat Kumar Yadav S/o Mahesh Ram Yadav, Aged About 26 Years R/o- Darra P.S. Kasdol, District- Raipur, Now The District- Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara, (Chhattisgarh),........(The Vehicle Driver The Tractor Bearing Registraion No. C.G. 4/db 2976 And Trolly No. Cg 04/db 3561)

2. Prem Lal Kevat, S/o Jethu Ram Kevat, Aged About 27 Years R/oChantipali, P.S. Kasdol, District- Raipur, Now The District- Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara, (Chhattisgarh), .....(The Vehicle Owner The Tractor Bearing Registration No. C.G. 4/db 2976 And Trolly No. Cg 04/db 3561)

3. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Vidhan Sabha Road Pandri, Raipur, District- Raipur, (Chhattisgarh),.......(Insurance Company) ---- Respondents For appellants :

Mr. Suresh Verma, Adv.

For Respondents No. 1 and 2 :

Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Adv.

For Respondent No. 3 :

Mr. N.K. Thakur, Adv.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai Order On Board 26/10/2016

1. Heard on I.A. No. 1/16 for condonation of delay in filing the instant MAC as the same has been filed after a delay of 2038 days of its limitation.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the sole cause for filing the appeal so lately is that the appellants are very poor persons. It is only after payment of Rs. 2,96,274/- by the respondent no. 3

towards satisfaction of the award and after disbursement, they have preferred instant MACA for enhancement of the award amount.

3. Perused the Annexure A-1 the copy of the award dated 27-9-2010 and Annexure A-2 by which R-3 has deposited the amount towards the satisfaction of the impugned award in favour of the appellant.

4. The appeal is barred by 2038 days. There is a provision that any person who is not in a position to file any appropriate litigation may avail the help of Legal Aid Authority and the concerned Legal Aid Authority is duty bound to examine the prayer and to provide free legal help including filing of the petition before the appropriate court and also to provide free legal assistance to such persons. There is no material on record to show whether the appellants ever applied before the concerned Legal Aid Authority for free legal aid.

5. On due consideration since there is nothing on record to show that the appellants tried to seek help of Legal Aid Authority and merely stating that they are poor persons is not a sufficient cause for delay, in the opinion of this Court, the appellants have failed to submit satisfactory reason for such a long delay.

6. Consequently, I.A. No. 1/16 is dismissed as not maintainable. MAC is also dismissed as time barred.

Sd/- (Chandra Bhushan Bajpai) Judge Pathak