IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2010 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1932 MACA.No. 623 of 2010() ---------------------- ( O.P.(MV)NO.184/2004 OF MACT, KASARAGOD) APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ ANEESA. K.M., AGED 34 YEARS, D/O MOHAMMED.K, RESIDING AT NEAR GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL, KUMBLA, KUMBLA POST, KOIPADY VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SOHAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. M.A.LATHEEF, S/O MOIDEENKUNHI, BEEYEF VILLA, NEAR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTRE, KUMBLA, KUMBLA POST, KOIPADY VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. S.IBRAHIM, S/O P.S.MOHAMMED, SHENI HOUSE, POST CHOKKADI, CHOKKADI VILLAGE, SULLIA TALUK, SOUTH KANARA, KARNATAKA-574212. 3. THE MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., KRISHNA BUILDING, MAIN ROAD, SULLIA-574239. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.623 of 2010 & C.M.Appln.No.779 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. In this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the prayer is to condone the delay of 1226 days in filing the appeal. 2. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, it is stated that the delay occurred since the petitioner/appellant had been undergoing treatment for the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident. It is beyond controversy that the award was passed by the Tribunal on July 27, 2006. But according to the petitioner/appellant, she could “make arrangements for taking carbon copy of the order” only on February 10, 2009 because she had been undergoing Indigenous Traditional Ayurvedic treatment like Uzhichil, Pizhichil etc. under the supervision of a lady Indigenous Ayurvedic Medical Practitioner. 3. It is conceded by the appellant/petitioner that she obtained the copy of the award on February 19, 2009. But still the appeal is seen to have been field only on March 15, 2010. There is not even an attempt to explain the delay of more than one year in filing the appeal even after obtaining the MACA.No.623/2010 2 copy of the award. Further, it is the admitted position that the petitioner had suffered only a fracture on the elbow joint. It is also on record that she had undergone treatment in the hospital only for eight days after the accident. In short, there is absolutely no material on record to indicate that petitioner could have been prevented by any major disability because of the accident. Admittedly she suffered only an injury on the elbow for which she has been awarded a sum of Rs. 91,800/- as compensation with interest and cost. Having perused the affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of delay apart from the award, we do not find any reason to condone the inordinate delay of 1226 days in filing the appeal. Though Ms.Mahalakshmi made a persuasive plea before us to take a lenient view, we are not satisfied that this is a fit case in which any leniency is to be shown. Therefore, the delay petition is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.623/2010 2