Allowed¶26

The Branch Manger v. Abinaya

Madras HC6 Nov 2025CMP(MD)/15280/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delay condonation; 31 days delay; CMP(MD) No. 15280 of 2025; CMA(MD) SR No. 60122 of 2025; Reliance General Insurance Company Limited; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; Motor Accident Claims Tribunal VI Additional District Judge (FAC) Madurai; M.C.O.P.No.116 of 2021; award dated 29.10.2024; appeal numbering; notice dispensed with; P.Velmurugan; L.Victoria Gowri; 06-11-2025.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 31 days in filing the appeal against the award dated 29.10.2024 condoned; petition ordered; Registry directed to number the appeal if otherwise in order. ¶26

The Branch Manger Vs Abinaya — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CMP(MD) NO. 15280 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06-11-2025

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶4

AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

CMP(MD) NO. 15280 of 2025 IN

¶7

CMA(MD) SR NO. 60122 OF 2025

¶8

The Branch Manger Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Having Office at Sri Meenakshi Plaza 1st Floor, Plot No.HIG 55 80 feet Road, Anna Nagar Madurai - 625 020.

¶9

Petitioner(s) Vs

¶10

Abinaya 2. Minor. V.Sudarsana (Minor 2nd respondent represented through her mother/guardian 1st respondent Abinaya) 3. A.Paulraj 4. V.Vasu 5. V.Sundarammal

¶11

Respondent(s)

¶12

For Petitioner(s): Mrs.K.R.Shivashankari

¶13

For Respondent(s):

¶14

M/s.V.Sakthi V.Janaki Devi For R1 & R2

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

Prayer:To condone the delay of 31 days in filing the above appeal against the Award dated 29.10.2024 made in M.C.O.P.No.116 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, VI Additional District Judge (FAC), Madurai and render justice.

¶17

ORDER

¶18

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble P.VELMURUGAN J. )

¶19

This petition has been filed to condone the delay of 31 days in filing the above

¶20

Appeal.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel

¶22

appearing for the respondents 1 & 2.

¶23

Though notice was served on the respondents 4 & 5 and their names are

¶24

printed in the cause list, there is no representation for the respondents 4 & 5.

¶25

Since the third respondent is the owner of the vehicle and the vehicle is insured with the insurance company, notice to the third respondent is dispensed with.

¶26