THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Dated this the 14th day of December 2009. C.M.A.No. 1248 of 2001. Between: Gangesetti Padma and 4 others. ………Appellants. Vs. Shaik Shilar Sahed and 4 others. ……… Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO C.M.A.No. 1248 of 2001. JUDGEMENT: This appeal is filed challenging the order dt. 6.2.2001 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada in I.A.No. 3852 of 1998 in M.V.O.P.No. 509 of 1994 whereby and whereunder the Tribunal below declined to condone the delay of 250 days in filing the petition to set aside the order dismissing the OP for default. The appellants who are the legal representatives of the deceased G.Krishnaiah who died in motor accident on 28.11.1994 filed the above OP seeking compensation on account of the death of the deceased. When the said OP was coming up for trial, it was dismissed for default on 10.12.1997 as there was no representation for the appellants. Thereafter, I.A.No. 3852 of 1998 was filed seeking to condone the delay of 250 days in filing the petition to set aside the order dismissing the OP for default on 10.12.1997. Upon considering the submissions made by both the parties, the Tribunal below declined to condone the delay of 250 days and dismissed the said IA, by the impugned order. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellants. None appears for the respondents. The grounds urged on behalf of the appellants before the Tribunal below are that the appellants/claimants are illiterates and they shifted their residence from their native place and therefore they could not contact their Advocate on record and consequently the petition to set aside the default order could not be filed in time. The legislature has introduced an amendment to the Motor Vehicles Act and as per the amended law, there is no limitation prescribed for filing a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act. Therefore, keeping in view the object behind the amendment, the present appeal can be allowed. Further, the reasons assigned for the absence of the appellants on 10.12.1998, on which date the OP was dismissed for default, are that the appellants are illiterates and they shifted their residence from their native place and therefore they could not contact their Advocate in time to file a petition to set aside the default order also appear to be genuine for condoning the delay. In view of the amended law and in view of the reasons given by the appellants for not filing the petition to set aside the default order in time, the delay can be condoned. However, as the delay was on account of the laches on the part of the appellants, they are not entitled for the interest during the interregnum period i.e. from 10.12.1997 (the date on which the OP was dismissed for default) till the date of the Judgment in the present appeal. Subject to the above condition, the appeal is allowed and consequently the order dt. 6.2.2001 in I.A.No. 3852 of 1998 in M.V.O.P.No. 509 of 1994 on the file of the MACT-cum-II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada is aside and said MVOP is restored to file. There is no order as to costs. ___________________ R.KANTHA RAO,J 14.12.2009. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO. C.M.A.No. 1248 of 2001 Dated: 14.12.2009.