Senthil v. Sudhagar
Case brief
What is this about?
An application to condone the 1479-day delay in filing an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The court found no sufficient cause and dismissed the petition, thereby rejecting the consequential appeal.
What did the court decide?
The Civil Miscellaneous Petition to condone delay is dismissed; the consequential Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is rejected.
What the court decided
C.M.P.No.4366 of 2022 in C.M.A.SR.19999 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on Pronounced on 02.03.2023 17.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
C.M.P.No.4366 of 2022 and C.M.A.SR.No.19999 of 2022
Senthil@Senthil Kumar
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.Sudhagar
- The Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Hub 3rd Party Claims, Vijayalakshmi Complex, First Floor, No.32/13, Phase No.2, Sathuvachari, Vellore.
... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, to condone the delay of 1479 days in filing the appeal.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 1479 days in filing an appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal judgment can be condoned.
Whether any sufficient cause was demonstrated to justify the conceding of the inordinate delay.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Senthil@Senthil Kumar
- respondent
Sudhagar
- respondent
The Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court