1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8268 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 1822 OF 2008 The United India Insurance Co. Limited ...Applicant Versus Shobhabai w/o Sarjerao Shinde and others ...Respondents ..... Mr. A.B. Gatne, advocate for the applicant Mr. A.W. Kshirsagar, advocate for respondent No.1 Mr.P.B. Rakhunde, advocate for respondent No. 2 ..... CORAM: R.G. KETKAR, J. DATED: 5TH NOVEMBER, 2009 PER COURT:- 1 This application is taken out for condoning the delay of 151 days caused in filing appeal. The M.A.C.T. by its order dated 9.1.2003 directed the respondents before it to jointly and severally pay the claimants interim compensation of Rs.25,000/-, being no fault liability, within a period of two months. 2 Against this decision, the applicant, initially preferred writ petition in this Court, which was eventually dismissed on 20.4.2004. Being aggrieved by the decision of this Court, rendered in the writ petition on 20.4.2004, Special Leave Petition was preferred by the applicant. The Apex Court allowed the special Leave petition and set aside the order passed by this 2 court and remanded the case for disposal in accordance with law. The Apex Court passed that order on 18.4.2005. The learned Single Judge of this Court had earlier held that the first appeal, challenging the order passed under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is not maintainable. Now, the said issue is no more res integra, as the Apex Court in the case of Yellwwa (Smt) and others Vs. National Insurance Company Limited and others, reported in (2007) 6 SCC 657, has held that the order passed under Section 140 of the Act is an award and appealable under Section 173 thereof. In view of this, writ petition was allowed to be converted into first appeal. It is on this ground the delay of 151 days is occasioned. 3 On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the applicant has not made out sufficient cause for condoning the delay. 4 After hearing learned counsel appearing for the parties and considering the assertions made in the application for condonation of delay, in my opinion, applicant has made out sufficient cause for condoning the delay. Hence, application is allowed in terms of prayer clause "B" with no order as to costs. 5. Put up the first appeal for admission on 17.11.2009. (R.G.KETKAR, J.) rlj/ 3