1 caf2229-09.doc ttm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2229 OF 2009 IN FIRST APEAL ST.NO.2274 OF 2009 Arjun Rambhau Gharat .. Applicant Vs. Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust and Anr. .. Respondents Mr.Pratap Patil for the applicant Mr.D.S.Hatle i/b Ms.Shardha Khanwilkar for the respondent no.2 CORAM: K.K. TATED, J. DATE: 15th DECEMBER, 2011 PC: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Though respondent no.1 is served, no one appeared on their behalf when the matter was called out for hearing. 3. This application is preferred by original claimant for condonation of delay in preferring appeal against the judgment and award dt.11.1.2008 passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Labour Court Mahad, in application (WCA) No.379/C-103/2005. 2 caf2229-09.doc 4. The learned counsel for the applicant states that after the accident, applicant is living at the mercy of his brother. As huge expenses had to be incurred, financial condition of applicant has become too weak and therefore, he could not contact his advocate. He further submits that incidentally, he met the present advocate on record who agreed to file the present appeal only on payment of pocket expenses and therefore, the present appeal is filed on 7.5.09. There is a delay of 419 days. Same has occurred because of financial difficulties. He further submits that the applicant has good chance of success in the matter. The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that considering the reasons disclosed in para 3 and 4 of Civil Application, delay be condoned. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent no.2 vehemently opposed the present Civil Application. He submits that the applicant has not disclosed any sufficient cause for condonation of 419 days delay in preferring the appeal. He further submits that the applicant has not taken any efforts to contact the advocate to file his matter in this court accepting only pocket expenses. On the basis of these submissions, the learned counsel for respondent no.2 submits that there is no substance in the present Civil Application and the same is liable to be dismissed with costs. 3 caf2229-09.doc 6. Admittedly, there is a delay of 419 days in preferring the present appeal against the impugned judgment and award dt. 11.1.2008. The accident took place on first day of his employment. Therefore, the reasons disclosed in para 3 of application about the financial difficulties, can be accepted for condonation of delay on the basis of the submission made by the learned counsel for applicant. 7. From the reasons disclosed in para 3 and 4 of Civil Application, I am of the opinion that applicant has made out sufficient cause for condonation of delay. 8. In view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances, Civil Application is allowed. Delay in filing First Appeal condoned. 9. Civil Application is disposed of accordingly. (K.K.TATED,J.)