IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2010 / 4TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 270 of 2010() ---------------------- OPMV.695/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT NO.2: ------------------------------ V.CHANDRAN NAIR, CHANDRAYALAM, PACHALLOOR P.O., THIRUVALLAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR SRI.R.RANJITH RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS 1 & 3: -------------------------------------------- 1. GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, KAIPPUZHA VEEDU, MALLAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE MALLAPPUZHASSERY WARD, ARANMULA P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. S.BALAN, MANGALATHU HOUSE, THURUTHIKKARA, KUNNATHOOR, KOLLAM. 3. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, P.B.NO.8, VIJAYA NAGAR, PULAMON P.O., KOTTARAKKARA. ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R3 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R3 SRI.T.K.VENUGOPALAN FOR R1 SRI.SHIBU JOSEPH FOR R1 SRI.ROY THOMAS (PATHANAMTHITTA) FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.M.Appln.No.336 OF 2010 IN M.A.C.A.No.270 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of July, 2010 ORDER Basheer, J. In this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the prayer is to condone the delay of 1518 days in filing the appeal. 2. The impugned award was passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal on September 1, 2005. According to the petitioner, who was respondent No.2 in the claim petition before the Tribunal, he had appeared through a counsel and filed a written statement contending inter alia that he had already sold the vehicle involved in the accident to one Mr.Abdul Razaq on January 30, 1998. However, the Tribunal passed the impugned award without accepting the above contention. 3. According to the petitioner, he was advised by his counsel that the liability, if any, that may arise, will be satisfied by the Insurance Company and if the company proceeds against him, he will get notice from the Tribunal. Petitioner contends that he was expecting a notice from the Tribunal and not from the Revenue Authorities. He has filed this appeal with a delay petition since he has been served with a Revenue recovery notice issued by the District Collector. The delay of 1518 days has occurred in the above facts and circumstances, it is averred by the petitioner. Having perused the averments in the affidavit, we are not at all satisfied with the so called explanation offered by the petitioner to condone the inordinate delay. Therefore, the delay petition is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.270 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. In view of the dismissal of C.M.Appln.No.336 of 2010, the appeal is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv.