Chinthapatla Srimathi/Padma v. P.Manoj Kumar

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.AMARNATH GOUD I.A.No.1 OF 2018 AND M.A.C.M.A.No. 735 of 2018 COMMON JUDGMENT:

Though learned counsel for the appellants submitted that they have given details of condoning the delay of 2750 days in filing the appeal, no such day to day delay or any cogent reasons have been stated in the affidavit.

Respondent No.2-insurance company filed counter vehemently opposing for condoning the inordinate delay and relied on judgment of the Apex Court in Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority and another v Gopi Chand Atreja1 that the inordinate delay and unexplained delay cannot be condoned. As there are no proper reasons explaining the inordinate delay and in view of decision of the Apex Court in Gopi Chand Atreja's case referred supra, the condone delay application is dismissed and accordingly, MACMA is rejected. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed.

__________________________ T. AMARNATH GOUD, J 11.09.2019 kvrm 1 AIR 2019 SC 1423