: 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2003 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.11326 OF 2009 Arun Mulchand Pawde ... Appellant V/s. Shanu Ramesh Gawali ... Respondent Ms.Neeta Karnik for Appellant Mr.A.B. Rai for Respondent CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 13TH AUGUST, 2009 P.C.: 1. The civil application has been filed for condoning the delay of 522 days in filing the appeal. The applicant is the owner of the truck which was involved in a road accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has granted the clam filed by the respondent and has directed the applicant to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the respondent. It is contended that the applicant was unable to raise funds to file the present appeal and, therefore, there is a delay in filing the appeal. 2. The application is opposed on behalf of the respondent by relying on the judgment of this Court in the case of Bipin H. Doshi vs. Jawaharlal Prajapati & Ors., 1999(1) ALL MR 63. In that judgment, a learned Single Judge of this Court has, : 2 : while deciding whether to condone the delay in filing the First Appeal under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, refused to condone the same on the ground that there was no sufficient cause for condoning the delay. It was held on the basis of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Banarasidas & Ors. v/s. State of U.P. & Ors., AIR 1956 SC 520 that the delay in filing the proceedings cannot be condoned merely on the ground of insufficient funds being available. The learned Judge has refused to condone the delay since there were vague statements made in the civil application. 3. In the present case, an appeal has also been filed by one of the claimants against whom the claim has been dismissed by holding that she was not the wife of the deceased. It appears from the statements made in the civil application that the applicant was arrested after recovery proceedings were initiated by the respondent against him. He was released only after he managed to arrange to deposit certain amounts. 4. In these circumstances, in my opinion, the delay must be condoned. Accordingly, the civil application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). The appeal to be numbered and placed for admission alongwith First Appeal No.156 of 2009 on 31.8.2009. : 3 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2004 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.11326 OF 2009 Arun Mulchand Pawde ... Appellant V/s. Shanu Ramesh Gawali ... Respondent Ms.Neeta Karnik for Appellant Mr.A.B. Rai for Respondent CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 13TH AUGUST, 2009 P.C.: S.O. to 31.8.2009. 2. The ad-interim relief granted on 6.5.2009 to continue till then.