1 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1616 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.29594 OF 2008 New Indian Assurance Co.Ltd. Appellant Vs. S.Venkatraman @ Raman Subramaniam & ors. Respondents Mrs.Urmila K. Sanil for applicant. Mr.T.J.Mendon for respondent no.1. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & S.J.VAZIFDAR,JJ. July 6, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard Mrs.Sanil, the learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.Mendon appears for the respondent no.1 – original claimant. First Appeal under Stamp No.29594 of 2008 has been filed belatedly and, therefore, initially Civil Application No.6233 of 2 2008 was filed for condonation of delay. The same was allowed to be withdrawn as per our order dated 6/2/2009 so as to file a fresh application with better particulars. 2. It has been stated that the award was passed on 11/3/2008 and on 17/3/2008 an application was made for certified true coy of the award. The certified true copy was received on 16/6/2008 and even with reference to the said date the appeal has been filed beyond time by 90 days. The appeal has been presented sometimes in December 2008 and, therefore, as per the report of the Registry the appeal is beyond time by 98 days. Mr.Mendon, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1 has invited our attention to the affidavit filed by the said respondent opposing this application and it has been contended that the appeal is beyond time by 205 days. By our earlier order dated 24/4/2009 we had called for a report from the Registrar, MACT, Mumbai and the said report dated 1/7/2009 is placed before us. It is imperative that the Registrar of MACT takes appropriate steps to ensure that the applications for certified true copies do not wait for such a long time and date on which the copy is to be delivered is mentioned and the applicant is made aware of such date and that the copies are 3 provided to the beneficiaries concerned as expeditiously as possible. 3. In the instant case we have noted, even from September 2008 onwards till December 2008 the applicant has provided some explanation, though not very justifiable and, therefore, while condoning the delay we are satisfied that costs will have to be levied. 4. Hence the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) subject to payment of costs quantified at Rs.2000/- and to be paid to the respondent no.1 within a period of two weeks from today. 5. List the appeal for admission on 27th July 2009. (S.J.VAZIFDAR,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)