This High Court dismissed a Misc. Appeal and the accompanying application for condonation of delay. The court held that the appellants failed to satisfactorily explain their 676-day delay in filing the appeal, as there was no evidence they were unaware of the award ceremony and thus did not meet the statutory requirements.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MAC No. 1188 of 2016
---- Appellants
Versus
---- Respondents
| For Appellants | : Shri Pawan Kesharwani, Advocate |
|---|---|
| For respondents 1 and 2 | : Shri Vikas Pradhan, Advocate |
| For respondent 3 | : Shri G.S. Patel, Advocate |
Hon'ble Shri Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai Order On Board
16/12/2016
2
consideration on its merits. He submits that the vehicle in question was insured and the Tribunal has wrongly exonerated the Insurance Company on the ground that under the settled law no one is allowed to sit in the tractor and trolley.
Sd/(Chandra Bhushan Bajpai) Judge
sunita
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 676 days in filing the appeal should be condoned despite all grounds of ignorance of award being insufficient.
Whether the requirements of Section 168(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act have been satisfied to deem the appellants as receiving the copy of the award.
Whether the requirement of presence of another person on the tractor/trolley affects the insurer's liability.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramesh Kumar Sahu S/o Dular Sahu
Jailal
Shoban Kanwar S/o Sidar Kanwar
Brijmoti W/o Shoban Kanwar
Regional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited
Chandra Bhushan Bajpai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
