1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 47. CA/12943/2008 In FAST/24211/2008 WITH CA/12944/2008 In FAST/24211/2008 --------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr. D.V.Soman, Adv., for the applicant. ... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED : 2nd July, 2009 ... P.C.:- Heard learned Counsel for the appellant Insurance Company. There is delay of 206 days in causing to file the appeal seeking to challenge the order below Exh.5 in MACP No.313/2006. The Insurance Company has deposited 50 per cent of the amount under No Fault Liability. It has a grievance that the award could not have been entertained as the vehicle in which the deceased was traveling was a goods vehicle and it was not a passenger vehicle. According to Insurance Company, it is breach of terms. The delay is not deliberate. It is 2 substantially explained as being due to official hassels which added to the misery. Delay is condoned. Application for condonation of delay allowed. The request for granting stay for an application under Section 140 of M.V.Act, at this stage is not entertained. (K.U. CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/ca12943-08