IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2008 / 28TH POUSHA 1929 MACA.No. 1968 of 2006() ---------------------------------- OPMV.2034/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------- JOBY JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH, KARIMBUMKALAYIL HOUSE, SREEKANDAMANGALAM KARA AND P.O., ATHIRAMPUZHA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) SRI.S.SUJIN RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. K.P.ABDUL KAREEM, S/O.PAREED, KALARIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VANIYAKAD, MANNAM P.O., NORTH PARUR (OWNER). 2. MADHU K.R., S/O.RAJAPPAN K.N., PUTHUVALPARAMBU HOUSE, KANIYAMKUNNU, U.C.COLLEGE P.O. (DRIVER). 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ALUVA DIVISIONAL OFFICE, P.B.NO.89, URAMBATH BUILDING, PUMP JUNCTION, ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.JOE KALLIATH THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18 / 01/2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.A.C.A.No.1968 OF 2006 and C.M.Appl.No.2064 of 2006 ------------------------------------- Dated 18th January, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . C.M.Appl.No.2064 of 2006 is a petition to condone the delay of 839 days in filing the appeal. Appellant is a businessman. As a result of the accident, he sustained fracture of femur, fracture of patella, fracture of lower end of left radius and lacerated injuries on the knee. Internal fixation was made and it was removed. Medical Board certified 30% disability. Tribunal found that 30% disability was certififed and it is categorised as mild disability. The claimant was not examined in court. He was an income tax payee. After seeing the income tax returns, Tribunal found that after the accident his business has flourished and his income has also been considerably increased. Total compensation awarded was Rs.1,35,500/- with interest. The award was passed by the Tribunal on 20.2.2004, but, certified copy was applied only on 4.4.2005. The reason stated is that he was unable to contact the lawyer and that is why the delay occurred in applying certified copy. After applying for certified copy, copy was obtained on 7.4.2005. Thereafter also there is more than one year delay. That delay was not explained. Considering MACA.1968/2006 2 the circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that no grounds are stated to condone the long delay. The delay condonation petition and consequently the appeal are dismissed. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE K.HEMA JUDGE tks