1 CAF No.3453/09 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3453 of 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL St.No.20093 of 2009 The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. ... Applicant versus (i) Mrs.Anisha Prakash Acharya (ii)Shri Jagdish P. Borile ... Respondents ... Mr. Ranjan Tripathi i/b A.S.Vidyarthi for the applicant. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 27th January 2011. P.C. 1. This civil application is made for condonation of delay of more than 1 year six months in filing of an appeal. The impugned award was passed on 27 October 2007 and appeal has been filed on 13 August 2009. In my view, the delay is not at all satisfactorily explained. 2. The award was passed on 27 October 2007 and certified copy was applied on 29 November 2007 and delivered on 5 October 2007. There was a delay in applying of the certified copy of more than one month which has not been explained at all. 2 CAF No.3453/09 3. Application mentions that the papers were forwarded by the applicant’s Thane office to the controlling office at Mumbai but some basic documents such as certified copy were not forwarded to the dealing advocate. The application is completely silent as to when the papers were sent to the Mumbai office and why an incomplete set of papers (without certified copy) were sent to the dealing advocate for filing of an appeal. That is not explained. 4. Learned advocate states that by his letter dated 8 April 2008, he had asked for the relevant papers but the relevant papers were not sent to him. He only states that first certified copy was misplaced, fresh certified copy was applied on 8 July 2009 and received on 9 July 2009. If the advocate had asked for the certified copy and relevant papers vide his letter dated 8 April 2008, why the application for fresh certified copy was not made for 13 months i.e till 8 July 2009 is not at all explained. This shows gross negligence on the part of the officers of the applicant company. The casual manner in which the applicant company has handled the matter cannot be said to be a sufficient cause for condonation of delay. 5. The application is rejected. (D.G.KARNIK, J)