Shriram General Insurance Company Limited v. Smt. Santoshi Bai Tarak
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Misc. Appeal (C) No.1282 of 2016 • Shriram General Insurance Company Limited 4th Floor, Maruti Heights, Beside Sky Automobiles, G. E. Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh..(Insurer Of Truck Of 06 M / 0195).) ---- Appellant
Versus
1. Smt. Santoshi Bai Tarak W/o Late Gopal Tarak, Aged About 40 Years R/o- Village- Pahanda, Post- Bhurka, Thana And Tahsil - Arang, District- Raipur, (Chhattisgarh), Present Address- Labhra, P.S., Tahsil And District- Mahasamund.
2. Purbal Tarak, S/o Late Ramlal Tarak, Aged About 65 Years R/oVillage- Pahanda, Post- Bhurka, Thana And Tahsil - Arang, District- Raipur, (Chhattisgarh), Present Address- Labhra, P.S., Tahsil And District- Mahasamund.
3. Smt. Sohadrabai Tarak, W/o Purbal Tarak, Aged About 62 Years R/o- Village- Pahanda, Post- Bhurka, Thana And Tahsil - Arang, District- Raipur, (Chhattisgarh), Present Address- Labhra, P.S., Tahsil And District- Mahasamund.
4. Ku. Jagriti Tarak, D/o Late Gopal Tarak, Aged About 19 Years R/o- Village- Pahanda, Post- Bhurka, Thana And Tahsil - Arang, District- Raipur, (Chhattisgarh), Present Address- Labhra, P.S., Tahsil And District- Mahasamund.
5. Rahul Tarak, S/o Late Gopal Tarak, Aged About 17 Years Minor Under The Guardianship Of Mother Smt. Santoshi Bai Tarak, R/o- Village- Pahanda, Post- Bhurka, Thana And Tahsil - Arang, District- Raipur, (Chhattisgarh), Present Address- Labhra, P.S., Tahsil And District- Mahasamund.
6. Ku. Tukeshwari Tarak, D/o Late Gopal Tarak, Aged About 12 Years Minor Under The Guardianship Of Mother Smt. Santoshi Bai Tarak, R/o- Village- Pahanda, Post- Bhurka, Thana And Tahsil - Arang, District- Raipur, (Chhattisgarh), Present AddressLabhra, P.S., Tahsil And District- Mahasamund,.......(Claimants).
7. Narendra Kumar Sahu, S/o Lalji Sahu, Aged About 38 Years R/o- Sitla Para, Behind Durga Temple Hasaud, P.S. And TahsilHasaud, District- Raipur, (Chhattisgarh),.....(Driver Of Truck No. C.G. 06 M / 0195).
8. Vijay Kumar Sahu, S/o Late Goverdhan Sahu, Aged About 45 Years R/o- Subash Nagar Mahasamund, P.S., Tahsil And District- Mahasamund, (Chhattisgarh),....(Owner Truck No. C.G. 06 M / 0195).
---- Respondents
For appellant : Shri Sachin Singh Rajput, Advocate Notice issued to respondent No.7 returned unserved. Notice issued to respondents 1 to 6 & 8 is awaited through ordinary mode.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai Order On Board 14.12.2016 Heard.
2.
The instant appeal has been preferred after 169 days of its limitation.
3.
Heard on IA No.01/16 for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
4.
It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the head office of the appellant Insurance Company is at Jaipur and a copy of the award was sent to the head office and thereafter further legal opinion was taken and the counsel for the appellant company decided to file the appeal. In the meantime, various changes took place in the appellant Company and the concerned file was kept with some other file and after due efforts, file was traced, appeal memo was prepared, hence, the delay is not intentional, same is bonafide, hence, the delay may be condoned and the appeal may be heard on its merits.
5.
The appellant is an insurance company, it has filed the appeal after 169 days of its limitation. The appellant has to explain the cause for delay satisfactorily. The appellant has failed to demonstrate the reasons satisfactorily.
6.
On due consideration, the reasons mentioned in the application, the ground for delay of 169 days in filing the appeal does not inspire confidence after perusal of the impugned award. Consequently, this Court is of the opinion that no case is made out on facts for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The application is thus liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. 7.
As a consequence, the appeal too is dismissed as being barred by time.
Sd/- (Chandra Bhushan Bajpai) JUDGE Bini