1 CA 1600/10 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1600 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 10551 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. S.K. Chari i/b M.V. Kini & Co. for the applicant. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 7TH FEBRUARY 2011 P.C. : 1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 171 days in filing of an appeal. The applicant is an employer and an award has been passed against him under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The entire application consists of only 2 paragraphs. Paragraph 2 seeks to explain the delay reads thus: 2 CA 1600/10 “2. The Appellants; Advocate in Trial Court applied for a certified copy on 29/07.2009 and was received on 17.08.2009. The said Judgment and Order was thereafter perused and studied by the Legal Department of the Appellant. Thereafter it was decided to file an Appeal against the said Order and copies of the said papers were sent to the Advocates for the Appellant, who in turn, has drafted the Memo of Appeal after receiving necessary instructions and hence this Appeal. There is a delay of 171 days in lodging the present Memo of Appeal which occurred due to time taken for Administrative office formalities in the office of the Appellants. The Appellants state that they have fair chance in succeeding in the Appeal and the ends of justice will be met by condoning the said delay and placing the matter for admission.” 3 CA 1600/10 2. In my view, the averments do not make out sufficient ground for condonation of delay. The averments are as vague as they could be. It is not mentioned when the legal papers were perused and studied by the legal department, who was the person in the legal department, who perused the papers and when did he give an opinion to file and thereafter within how many days the appeal has been filed. On the vague averments, the delay cannot be condoned. The application is accordingly rejected. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)