MC 4275/2007 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. AB Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. Sen Deka, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2. The name of respondent No. 4, the State of Assam is struck of from the list of r espondents as prayed for by the learned counsel for the applicant. The other respondent is not represented. The applicant, by this application, is praying for condonation of delay of 222 d ays in filing the appeal contending inter alia that initially the petitioner fil ed WP(C) No. 468/2007 challenging the award dated 30.8.2006 passed by the learne d Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation and subsequently having realised that an appeal is provided for under the provision of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 19 23 (now the Employees Compensation Act), the said writ petition was withdrawn on 2.2.2007 with liberty to file appeal. It has also been contended that the learn ed counsel thereafter though tried to contact the present applicant, he however, could not be contacted in time and on being contacted he came to Guwahati on 31 .5.2007 and accordingly the memo of appeal was filed thereby causing a delay of 222 days. In the objection filed the respondent No. 2 has contended that the applicant has not been able to demonstrate sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time . Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon consideration of the a verments made in the application seeking condonation of delay and the objection filed, I am of the view that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause in not preferring the appeal in time. Hence the delay of 222 days occurred in filin g the appeal is condoned. Misc. case stands allowed.