•gffl? lp^,W HjGH C_OURTOF CHHATTSSGARH AT BILASPUR Sina!e_Bench Hon'bte Shri Dilip Raosaheb DeshmMkh^J. (Cialmant) Versus 1. i.A.SC.) No.986/2008 Pawan Kumar Doungare, S/o Late 8. N. Doungare, Aged sbout 47 years, R/oSatti Bazar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) At present R/o Office of the Coitector, Mahasamund, Tahsil & District Mahasamund (C.G.) (Non-appiicantsj 2. Ishwar La! Chandrakar, Age 35 years, S/o Krishna Kumar Chandrakar, Rlo Viiiage Patioud, P.S. Mandirhasaud, District Raipur (CG) (Driver of Mini Bus No.C.G.- 04/E/0199) Haradhan Dey, S/o Late N. C. Dey, R/o Mana Camp, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) (Owner of Mini Bus No.C.G.- 99) The New india insurance Company Limited, Division Office, At Madina Building, Jaii Road, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) (insurance Com. of Mini Bus No.C.G.- 04/E/0199) IVtemo of iviiscelianeous Appeal under Section 173_of_theMot_or Vehicles Act. Preseni: Shri J. A. Lohani, counsei forthe appellant. 3. ^, (Passed on this 22illi day of July, 2008) Heard on I.A.No.1, which is an application for condonation ofdelay in fiiing this appeal. (2). This appea! by the claimants for enhancement of compensatlon Is barred by limitation. The only ground urged by learned counse! for the appeilant jn the application for condonation ofdelay in filingthis appeal is as under:- • , — 2 "That the appellant was having no knowtedge about Law and its period of limitation of filing appeal, therefore was unabie to reach before this Hon'bie Court within the period of itslimitation 90 days." (3) In my considered opinion, the ground mentioned above does not constitute a vaiid ground for condonation of delay in filing Shis appeai. (4) Since no good ground is shown for condonation of deiay in filing this appeal, the application I.A.No.1 is dismissed. As a consequence thereof, the appeai also stands dismissed as barred by limitation. S3F DUipRaossaheb Deshm'Ah Judge lumsne