IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 28TH MAGHA 1932 MACA.No. 242 of 2011() ----------------------------- OPMV.3230/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S):PETITIONER --------------------------------- N.P.UDAYAKUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.PADMANABHAN, MULANGAPARAMBIL HOUSE, NILAYIDATH PALLOM DESOM, PANAYIKULAM P.O., ALANGAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU SRI.R.RANJITH RESPONDENT(S):RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------- 1. GEORGE, S/O.PAPPACHAN, ARACKAL HOUSE, NEAR TOWN HALL, KALAMASSERY P.O., PIN – 683 104. 2. VINOD KUMAR, S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, SURESH BHAVAN, NEAR SANTHI NAGAR, T.O.G.ROAD, KALAMASSERY P.O., PIN – 683 104. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI,JJ. ........................................... C.M.Appln.No.377 OF 2011 and M.A.C.A.NO.242 OF 2011 ............................................. Dated this the 17th day of February, 2011. O R D E R Basheer, J: The prayer in this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is to condone the delay of 711 days in filing the appeal. 2. The impugned award passed by the Tribunal way back on December 31, 2007. It is admitted by the petitioner/appellant that an application for obtaining certified copy of the award was filed on January 15, 2007 itself and that the copy was ready on October 7, 2008. It is seen from the averments in the affidavit that the petitioner had instituted an execution petition before the Tribunal in August, 2009. According to the petitioner, he decided to prefer this appeal since the respondents did not deposit the entire award amount. The only prayer in the appeal is for enhancement of the compensation. 3. Having perused the averments in the affidavit, we : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.242 OF 2011 are not at all satisfied with the so called explanation offered by the appellant/petitioner to condone the delay of 771 days in filing the appeal. Therefore, this application is dismissed. Consequently the appeal is also dismissed. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q. BARKATH ALI,JUDGE. cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.242 OF 2011 : 4 : M.A.C.A.NO.242 OF 2011