THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4791 OF 2008 DATED:07.04.2011 Between: Elmala Ashok. .... PETITIONER And S.Narsingam & another. .... RESPONDENTS ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 06.02.2007, in I.A.No.1128 of 2006 in O.P.No.208 of 2001 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Adilabad, wherein the application filed by the petitioner herein under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 695 days, was dismissed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared for the respondent. Perused the record 3. Petitioner herein filed O.P.No.208 of 2001 seeking compensation for the injury sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident. Respondents filed counter contesting the matter. When the matter was coming up for enquiry, it is stated that the petitioner’s counsel was not present when the matter was called and the petitioner was also absent and therefore the O.P. was dismissed for default. Petitioner filed a petition for restoration of the O.P., setting aside the default dismissal order. There is however a delay of 695 days and for condonation of the same the present application-I.A.No.1128 of 2006 is filed. The learned District Judge dismissed the application on the ground that the delay is not properly explained and the petitioner kept over the matter for a long time. The learned District Judge further observed that if this type of petitions are entertained there will be heavy pendency in the Courts. It is to be noted that the O.P. is filed by the petitioner for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which is a beneficial piece of legislation. Petitioner ought to have been diligent in pursuing the O.P. filed by him. Further, having regard to the fact that the O.P. is filed claiming compensation for the injuries, it is considered that an opportunity can be given to the petitioner to have his claim disposed of on merits. It is however made clear that if the petitioner does not pursue the matter diligently the Tribunal can pass appropriate orders. In the circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and I.A.No.1128 of 2006 stands allowed. The learned District Judge may dispose of the said application filed for restoration on its own merits. 4. Accordingly, Civil Revision Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 07th April, 2011. Tsy