{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10467 OF 2005 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10468 OF 2005 WITH FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.14750 OF 2005 Inderchand Motilal Jain APPLICANTS VERSUS Totaram Shivdas Badgujar & others RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.H.D.Patil h/f Mr.P.B.Patil for applicant Mr.D.M.Shinde h/f Mr.N.L.Chaudhari, Advocate for R­2 Mr.Amol Gatne h/f Mr.A.B.Gatne for respondent No.7 ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE : 5th September 2009 PER COURT: 1. By the present applications, the applicant has prayed for condonation of delay of 281 days caused in preferring an appeal challenging the judgment and award dated 05.08.2004 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhule in MACP No.208/1997 and for stay to the same. 2. The applicant has contended that as the address of the applicant was changed which was not communicated to his advocate and hence the result of the petition could not be known to {2} the applicant in time. The applicant has further contended that he came to know about the impugned judgment on 30.08.2008 because of communication gap and hence the delay has been caused in preferring the appeal. 3. It is difficult to digest the submissions of the applicant as the party against whom claim of heavy compensation is filed is not keeping track of the proceedings, is hard to believe. I do not find that the applicant has given sufficient and satisfactory reasons for condonation of delay. In the result, the application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed with no order as to costs. 4. As the civil application for condonation of delay is dismissed the application seeking stay does not survive and hence the same is dismissed accordingly. 5. The accompanying first appeal also does not survive in view of dismissal of application for condonation of delay and therefore, stands rejected. The applicant is entitled for refund of court fees as per rules. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/ca10467­05