1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Civil Appln. No. 3507 of 2007 Ex. Engineer Mechanical Stores Vs. Arjun Bhagwan Kalekar Development Division thr. L. Rs. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Shri Jaiswal AGP. for applicant/State. Shri Deshpande Adv for non applicant. CORAM: C. L. PANGARKAR J. Dated: 8 th February, 2008. Heard the counsel for the applicant and the respondents. This is an application for condonation of delay of 664 days in preferring an appeal against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The application was 2 filed by Arjun Bhagwan Kalekar after he suffered injuries in the accident. The award came to be passed on 02.09.04 and the appeal has been presented in the Court on 26.09.07. There is, therefore, a delay of more than 600 days. The appellants seek to condone the delay and it appears that the delay occurred on the ground that there was a dispute between the officers as to who should pay the compensation amount. Such type of dispute can hardly be a ground for condonation of delay. No other ground has been mentioned in the application for condonation of delay. This kind of dispute resulted in unnecessary correspondence between the two officers. I do not find that this is a sufficient ground for condonation of delay. Further more it has to be seen that Arjun had suffered injuries and was said to be disabled by 35%. It also appears 3 that after filing of the application he died of the injuries suffered by him on account of several operations which he was required to undergo. The fact is that injured has died. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had awarded the compensation of Rs. 73,000/- only, which is in fact not an adequate compensation. Considering the fact that the injured Arjun died subsequent to the filing of the application and the compensation was however awarded on the basis of the disability only by any standard the amount of compensation awarded by the trial Court is just adequate. Considering this I do not find that there is any merit in the appeal and there is no reason to condone the delay. Application is a rejected. JUDGE svk