sfSfe, ^ HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BiLASPUR SinaieBench : Hoji'^bl^ShrLDLIip Ra?Bf''-:^n^i Misceltaneous Appeal (C.i No.320 pf 2006 1. Smt. Sewanta Bai, aged about 40 years, W/o Fuichand Sahare 2. Fuichand, S/o Ramkishan Sahare, aged about 43 years, Both resident of Viiiage Ghortatav, Post Sadak Chlrchari, P.S. Bagnadi, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 1. Manohar Singh, aged about 40 years, S/o Anup Singh, Caste Sinha R/o Village & Post Saraipaii, District Respondents 2. Manjeet Singh, S/o N. Singh Saiuja, aged about nil years, R/o Main Road, Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 3. The Nev/ india Insurance Company Limited, Shrough: Divisional Manager, Second-Floor, R.D.A. Building, Raipur Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act Present: Shri Goutam Khetrapai, counsel for the appellants. Shri Ajay Mishra, counsei for respondent No.3. No one appears for respondents No.1 and 2. (Passed on this 08"' day of Juiy, 2008) Heard on M.(C.)P.No.1819/2006, an application for condonation of delay.in filing this appeal. (2) The appeliants have mentioned in the application M.(C.)P.No.1819/2006 that delay of oniy 3 days has occurred in filing the appeal. However, the above statement is grossiy incorrect because the appeal is barred by 748 days. No ground for condoning this inordinate deiay has been mentioned in the application. Learned counsel for the appellants did not dispute that the appeliants were -2-- represented by counse! before the tribunai. !n this view of the matter, jt cannot be countenanced that the appelte.nts did not know about the friins of appea!. There is no ground for condoning the huge delay in filjng the appeal. The apptfeation M.(C,)P.No.1819/2006 is (llsmissed. As a consequence thsreof, the misce'laneous appea! fe afso dismissed s.s barred by iimitation. Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge Gopsi