IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.151 of 2008 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Versus KAUSHALIYA DEVI @ SUNAINA &ORS ----------- 3. 19.11.2008 I.A. No. 4716 of 2008 is a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act wherein a prayer has been made for condoning the delay in the filing of this appeal which is an award allowing compensation of Rs.2, 00,000.00 along with an interest @ of 9 per cent in the matter of an accident in which the child, aged five years of the claimants had died and the appellant being insurer of the concerned vehicle was held liable for the payment of compensation. In the I.A. a delay of 77 days is stated and the same has been prayed to be condoned. But on perusal of the records and the office report with regard to calculate the limitation period as done on the reverse of the Vakalatnama it appears that the limitation for filing this appeal expired on 1.12.2007. But this appeal has been filed on 18.3.2008. Thus there is actual delay of 105 days in the filing of this appeal. It is mentioned in the I.A. itself that within one week of the receipt of the copy of the award from the Court, the same was handed over by the appellant’s lawyer to the concerned Branch Manager and that thereafter the Branch Manager proceed the same and sent it on wards to the divisional office, Gaya. It is further stated that the divisional office sent it further to regional office and that legal opinion was obtained there. It is also mentioned that the competent authority to grant approval for filing the appeal was outstation due to being on tour and leave and thus the delay was caused. - 2 - On perusal of the grounds it appears that only official paraphernalia has been made a ground for the delay but any specific date is not mentioned as on which date the file was received by which Officer and on which date it was sent to next higher Officer and from which date the competent authority remained outstation on tour and leave. Thus, there is no reasonable explanation for the long delay of 105 days and the laches in the filing of this appeal. In such view of the matters, I find no sufficient ground to condone the delay in the filing of this appeal. Therefore, the prayer for condoning the delay is refused. The I.A is, accordingly, dismissed. As a consequence of the rejection of the aforesaid I.A., this appeal will also stand dismissed as time barred. Mr. Ashok Priyadarshi, the learned counsel for the appellant moving the aforesaid I.A., submits that a sum of rupees 25000/- was deposited in this Court as security money for filing this appeal and he prays for a direction to withdraw the amounts. He is permitted to withdraw it. (C.M. Prasad, J.) Ravi/-