IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2011 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1933 MACA.No. 667 of 2011() ---------------------- OPMV.465/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER ------------------------ BALACHANDRAN ASAN,S/O.MADHAVAN UNNITHAN, AGED 53 YEARS,'PRASANTHY',KURUMANDAL B WARD, PERUMPUZHA,PARAVOOR, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. SKARIA.C,S/O.CHACKO,DHANYA BHAVAN, PUNUKKANNOOR, ALUMOOD PO, KOLLAM,PIN 691 577. 2. VINOD.B,S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KUNNUVILA,BHOOTHAKKULAM 691 302. 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,KOLLAM REP.BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER,DIVISIONAL OFFICE, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM,PIN 691 001. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.M.Appln.No.1089 OF 2011 in M.A.C.A.No.667 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. The prayer in this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is to condone the delay of 1549 days in filing the appeal. 2. The impugned award was passed by the Tribunal way back on June 12, 2006. But according to the petitioner/appellant, he could not file the appeal in time, since he did not receive any information about the case from the clerk attached to the office of his counsel in the Tribunal. It is seen admitted by the deponent that copy of the award was received by the counsel on December 15, 2006 itself. But according to him, the clerk had misplaced the case bundle and therefore he could not inform the petitioner about the case. It is further conceded by the petitioner that he made enquiries about the case only recently and the case bundle was handed over to him by his counsel on April 12, 2011. But still, he could file the appeal only on reopening of the court. MACA.No.667/2011 2 Having perused the averments in the affidavit, we are not at all satisfied with the so called explanation offered by the petitioner to condone the inordinate delay. Therefore, the delay petition is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.No.667/2011 3