1 CAF No.403/11 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.403 of 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL St.No.2560 of 2011 WITH FIRST APPEAL St.No.2560 of 2011 The New India Insurance Co.Ltd. ... Applicant versus (i) Smt.Parvati Dhondiba Suryawanshi (ii)Mohan Shivaji Jadhav ... Respondents ... Ms.D.Shalini Shankar for the applicant CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 11th February 2011 P.C. 1. This is an application for condonation of delay of nearly 2 months in filing of an appeal. The application is laconic and the only reason for condonation of delay given is in paragraph no.2 of the application which reads thus: “2. The present Appeal may be admitted as there is sufficient cause for such a delay due to unavoidable circumstances, being a public institution it takes time to take decision whether to 2 CAF No.403/11 go for First Appeal or otherwise due to which there was delay.” 2. The mere fact that applicant is a public institution by itself is no ground for condonation of delay. The period of limitation is the same for a private individual as well as public institution. Public institution cannot claim extension of time of filing of an appeal or commit the delay in filing of an appeal only on the ground that it is a public institution. Though the fact that applicant is a public institution may be taken into consideration while considering whether there is a sufficient cause for delay, that fact by itself and in the absence of other facts cannot be a ground for condonation of delay. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on account of non receipt of money for paying necessary amount of court fees, the delay has been caused. The applicant is not a company which cannot afford the payment of the court fee. Applicant has a turnover of over thousands of crores of rupees and profits of also several hundreds of crores of rupees. Being an insurance company it routinely files hundreds of appeals every year. As such must put in place appropriate machinery for obtaining necessary administrative sanctions and has only to blame itself if it has not done so. In the circumstances, there can be no justification for delay in not paying the amount necessary to the advocate for buying of the court fee stamps. No other ground was urged. Application is rejected. As the delay is not condoned the appeal is dismissed as barred by limitation. (D.G.KARNIK, J)