Disposed

Divisional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., v. Amutha, W/O. Rajendran

Madras HC29 Jul 2019CMP(MD)/6016/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court, Madurai Bench, on July 29, 2019, disposed of a petition seeking condonation of a 151-day delay in presenting a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. The court inclined to condone the delay subject to the payment of court fees and directed listing of the appeal if costs are paid.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 151 days' delay granted subject to payment of Rs.500 cost to Legal Services Committee within one week; appeal to be listed 'for admission' upon payment.

Divisional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company… — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

¶3

Monday, the Twenty Ninth day of July Two Thousand Nineteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice J.NISHA BANU

¶6

CMP(MD) No.6016 of 2019 IN CMA(MD) No.SR48189 of 2018

¶7

DIVISIONAL MANAGER,

¶8

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., 6-A, BANGUR DHARMASALA SATHIRAM, MELAVELI VEETHI, MADURAI.

¶9

... PETITIONER/ APPELLANT/ 2^nd RESPONDENT

¶10

¶11

1 AMUTHA

¶12

2 MINOR KAMALA KANNAN

¶13

3 MINOR SANJEEVI KANNAN ... 1-3 RESPONDENTS/1-3 RESPONDENTS/ 1-3 PETITIONERS

¶14

(MINORS 2^nd AND 3^rd RESPONDENTS REP.BY THEIR GUARDIAN/ MOTHER OF 1^st RESPONDENT AMUTHA)

¶15

4 R.B.SENTHILKUMAR

¶16

... 4^th RESPONDENT/ 4^th RESPONDENT/ 1^st RESPONDENT

¶17

(4^th RESPONDENT REMAINED EXPARTE BEFORE THE LOWER COURT)

¶18

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to condone the delay of 151 days in representing the above CMA.SR.No.48189 of 2018

¶19

PRAYER IN CMA(MD) No.SR48189 of 2018:

¶20

To set aside the decree and judgment passed in M.C.O.P.No.26/2016, dated 27.10.2017, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and Additional District Judge, Paramakudi.

¶21

ORDER : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.K.BHASKARAN, Advocate for the petitioner, the court made the following order:-

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶23

Heard.

¶24

¶25

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to condone the delay of 151 days in representing the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

¶26

2.Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition and also considering the length of delay, this Court is inclined to condone the delay subject to the payment of cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) to the Legal Services Committee, attached to this Bench, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which this petition shall stand dismissed automatically without any further reference to this Court.

¶27

3.This petition is accordingly ordered.

¶28

In the event of payment of cost, the Registry is directed to number the appeal, if it is otherwise in order and list the same “for admission” forthwith.

¶29

/ TRUE COPY /

¶30

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶31

¶32

THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, PARAMAKUDI.

¶33

COPY TO:

¶34

THE OFFICER INCHARGE, LEGAL AID SERVICE AUTHORITY, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶35

THE SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, AE SECTION, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶36

ORDER

¶37

IN CMP(MD) No.6016 of 2019 IN

¶38

CMA(MD) No.SR48189 of 2018 Date :29/07/2019

¶39

MS/VR/SAR-3/01.08.2019/2P.4C

¶40

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Divisional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., v. Amutha, W/O. Rajendran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Divisional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., v. Amutha, W/O. Rajendran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.Jeyalakshmi, W/O.Late.R.M.T. Vs R.M.T.S.S.Suryakumar

Arumugapandi, S/O.Perumalnadar Vs Issakiammal

Kaliammal Vs Subramanian, 91, Doovipuram

Ramaiyan Vs Venugopal

M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Vs Sivamanikandan

S.Jeyalakshmi, Vs Managing Director