as?. HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BiLASPUR Single Bench: Appeilant Defendant No.2 Hon'bie Shri Dilip Raossheb Deshmukh, J. iVi.A.C.No. 928 of 2008 The Oriental tnsurance Company LirRited, through ths DivisSonal Manager, Divisional Office-Raipur through the Djvisiona! Manager, OIC, Divisional OFfice Bilaspur (CG) Claimsnt )hd. Nayees alias Nankau son of Mohd Za!eeS aged about 34 years, resident of Patti Ward No.10, Tah. Patti, Distt. Pratapgarh (UP) Presently resident of Andrews Ward, Daupara, Mungeii, Distt. Bilaspur 2. Sudheer Singh son of Mata Bhakas Singh, aged about 25 years, vehicle owner, Bus No. CG 10-A/5518, R/o Amiipara, Near Bus Stand, Bilaspur Distt. Biiaspur (CG) Miscel!aneoys appeai underSection 173 ofthe MotorVehicles Act, 1988. iishra, counsei for the appeiiant. Present: Shri Ajay (Passed on 15.07.2008) Heard on S.A. No.2 for taking certified copy of the order passed by the Tribunai under Section 170 of the Wotor Vehicies Act on record. (2) Considered and ailowed. Document is taken on record. (3) Aiso heard on i.A. No.lfor condonation of deiay of 63 days in filing the appeai. (4) In the appiication, the appettani/insurer has not divuigedany ground for condonation of deiay and has simply mentioned in para 3 as under:-' 'N. . ~ c^?/v+^ -^s- Priya ,^s f^ "That there is reasonable delay in filing the present appeal, as the same has been caused in obtaining ofRcial permission, hence this applicaffon." (5) fn my considersd opinion, no ground much iess sufficient cause has been shown for the delay in fiiing the appeal. Accordingiy, I.A. No.1 for condonation of deiay is dismissed. As a consequence thereof, the appeai is also dismissed as barred by iimitetjon,_—-cXf^ ~^^^'ffl" /" x