IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2011 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1933 MACA.No. 437 of 2011() ---------------------- OPMV.411/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER ------------------------ P.G.MOHANAN, S/O.GOVINDAN, PUTHENVEEDU HOUSE, MAMKOMBE, AMBALAVAYAL P.O., AMBALAVAYAL VILLAGE, WAYANAD. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PRASANTH RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. T.P.VINOD, S/O.PANKAJAKSHAN, THAZATHUMADHARKKENIL HOUSE, KADALMAD P.O., THOMATTUCHAL, VADUVANCHAL, PIN 673 581. 2. T.P.PANKAJAKSHAN, S/O.PRABHAKARAN, THAZHATHUMADHARKKENIL HOUSE, KADALMAD P.O., THOMATTUCHAL, VADUVANCHAL, PIN 673 581. 3. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, MGT BUILDINGS, KALPETTA NORTH, WAYANAD. 673121 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. --------------------------------------------- C.M.Appln. No.735 of 2011 & M.A.C.A. No. 437 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT A.K. Basheer, J. The prayer in this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is to condone the delay of 1083 days in filing the appeal. 2. The impugned award was passed by the Tribunal way back on June 28, 2007. According to the petitioner/ appellant he had requested his counsel before the Tribunal to file an appeal against the award and handed over the file to him. But later, the petitioner came to know that his counsel had left the country without filing the appeal. It is further averred that thereafter the present counsel was engaged. According to the petitioner the delay has occurred in the above facts and circumstances. 3. The affidavit does not reveal the name of the counsel who was initially engaged. After noticing this lacuna the learned counsel for the appellant sought for further time to file an additional affidavit. C.M.Appln. No.735 of 2011 &M.A.C.A. No. 437 of 2011 2 4. Today when the case is taken up for consideration learned counsel submits that no additional affidavit is being filed. 5. It can be seen from the endorsements on the award that the application was filed on December 27, 2010 and the copy was obtained on January 20, 2011. But it is seen that the appeal was filed before this Court in September 2010 itself. Learned counsel submits that the appeal was preferred with a photostat copy. Strangely the photostat copy does not contain any endorsement by the office of the Tribunal. In short the affidavit filed by the petitioner is totally vague, to say the least. 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. rkc