MC 680/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T VAIPHEI Heard Mr SK Goswami, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr T J Mahanta, t he learned counsel for the claimant/respondents. The delay sought to be condoned in this application is for 655 d ays in presenting the connected appeal. The application is strongly opposed by the learned counsel for t he respondents by contending that gross negligence in prosecuting the case by th e applicant-Insurance Co. looms large. The learned counsel for the claimant/res pondents further contends that even after receipt of the bakija notice, the appl icant chose to sleep over the matter for more than a year and as such this is no t a fit case for condoning the delay which on the face of it is inordinate. Th e learned counsel for the applicant drawing my attention to paragraphs 3,4, 5, 6 and 7 of the application submits that as the delay has been occasioned by the m is-conduct of the learned counsel defending the case of the applicant, the appli cant should not be made to suffer for this, more so, when public money is involv ed. I am constrained to observe that the applicant did not conduct the case in a manner as expected of it. Simply engaging an Advocate and entrusting him to pro secute the case are not enough. The applicant ought to have taken the matter wi th the seriousness by monitoring the progress of the case from time to time. In the instant case, the manner in which the applicant prosecuted the case shows t hat it did not discharge its duties responsibly. Therefore, I am not fully satis fied with the explanation of the delay given by the applicant. Nevertheless, th e negligence of the applicant, howsoever gross it may be, shall have to be consi dered together with the loss of public money should the appeal be not heard on m erits. Taking into the account, the law laid down by the Apex court in N Balakri shnan vs. M Krishnamurty, reported in (1998) 7 SCC 123, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case to turn down the plea of the applicant and to shut the d oor against it. Having said that, the interest of the claimant/respondents is a lso to be kept in mind while considering the question of condoning the delay in filing the appeal by the applicant. In the result, the delay is condoned subjec t to payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/- by the applicant to the claimant/respondent s within one month from today. Order accordingly.