Allowed¶20

The Branch Manager New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 1ST Floor,Bl Avenue,Basmath Road Parbhani v. Ashok Kondiba Hanwate

Delay condonation – Section 5, Limitation Act

Bombay HC13 Jan 2025CA/4533/2024

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay; 209 days' delay in filing appeal; Section 5 Limitation Act; sufficient cause; administrative reasons; juristic person; insurance company applicant; New India Assurance Co. Ltd.; original claimants opposed; Civil Application No. 4533 of 2024 in FAST/10987/2024; Aurangabad Bench, Bombay High Court; allowed 13.01.2025.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 209 days in filing the Appeal condoned; Appeal to be registered subject to removal of office objections; notice to respondents returnable on 10.02.2025; Record and Proceedings called for. ¶20

The Branch Manager New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 1ST Floor,Bl Avenue,Basmath Road Parbhani Vs Ashok Kondiba Hanwate — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

33-ca-4533-2024.odt

(1)

2025:BHC-AUG:927

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4533 OF 2024 IN FAST/10987/2024

¶6

THE BRANCH MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD 1ST FLOOR,BL AVENUE,BASMATH ROAD PARBHANI VERSUS

¶7

ASHOK KONDIBA HANWATE

¶8

Mr. Ajit B. Kadethankar, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. P. S. Agrawal, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3. Mr. V. M. Maney, Advocate for Respondent No.4.

¶9

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. DATED : 13^th JANUARY, 2025.

¶10

P.C.:-

¶11

Heard Mr. Kadethankar, learned Advocate appearing for the applicant.

¶12

By this application, the applicant seeks to condone the delay of 209 days caused in filing the appeal.

¶13

Mr. Kadethankar submits that delay is occasioned on the ground of administrative reasons. The applicant has not derived any disadvantage by making such delay.

¶14

Per contra, Mr. Agrawal, learned Advocate appearing for the original claimants vehemently opposes the application. According to him, reasons as stated in the application does not constitute sufficient cause within the meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

¶15

Having considered the submissions advanced and the reasons stated in the application, it is apparent that the applicant is a juristic person and carries out its day-to-day administration

¶16

33-ca-4533-2024.odt

¶17

(2)

¶18

through its employees. The employees are bound to follow the rules of administration. In adhering to these requirements, a delay appears to have occurred, which was not intentional. As such, a case is made out to condone the delay. Hence, following order:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

a. Civil Application is allowed.

¶21

b. Delay of 209 days caused in filing the Appeal is hereby condoned.

¶22

c. Appeal be registered subject to removal of office objections, if any.

¶23

d. On registration of Appeal, issue notice to respondents, returnable on 10.02.2025. Mr. Agrawal, learned Advocate waives notice for original claimants/respondent nos.2 and 3.

¶24

e. Call for Record and Proceedings.

¶25

f. Civil Application is disposed of.

¶26

(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE

¶27

Devendra/January-2025

The Branch Manager New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 1ST Floor,Bl Avenue,Basmath Road Parbhani v. Ashok Kondiba Hanwate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Branch Manager New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 1ST Floor,Bl Avenue,Basmath Road Parbhani v. Ashok Kondiba Hanwate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Priyanka Kaduba Thube and Ors. Vs Vijay kadu Suryawanshi and Anr.

Acko General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Anjana Ankush Chavan and Ors.

Yusufkhan Sikandar Khan Pathan Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Collector Beed and Anr.

Sudarshan @ Ganesh Bibshen Kale vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

The Branch Manager New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 1ST Floor,Bl Avenue,Basmath Road Parbhani Vs Ashok Kondiba Hanwate

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. through Its Branch Manager, Vs Smt. Surekha Ramesh Kale and Others