IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2011 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1932 MACA.No. 253 of 2011() ------------------- OPMV.2330/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .............. APPELLANT / PETITIONER : ----------------------------------------- STAICY.M. MANJOORAN, MANJOORAN HOUSE, THAIKKATTUKARA, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DT. BY ADVS. SMT.MINI ELIZABETH GEORGE SMT.V.S.SIMI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, THENAYATH HOUSE, EDANADU, CHOWARA P.O., ERNAKULAM DT., PIN – 683 571. 2. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., KODUVATHU SHOPPING COMPLEX, SUB JAIL ROAD, ALUVA, PIN – 683 101. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI,JJ. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.253 OF 2011 & C.M.Appln.NO.394 OF 2011 ............................................. Dated this the 21st day of February, 2011. JUDGMENT Basheer, J: The prayer in this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is to condone the delay of 987 days in filing the appeal. 2. The impugned award was passed by the Tribunal way back on January 23, 2008. It is admitted by the petitioner that an application to obtain certified copy of the award was filed on January 29, 2008 and that the copy was obtained on February 22, 2008 itself. But, according to the petitioner, though the counsel advised her to file an appeal, she could not take steps to do so because of “intense back pain and stiffness” that used to bother her very often. Ultimately in the first week of June, 2008 she decided to file the appeal. But by that time, certified copy of the award and the case file were found missing from the counsel's office. The file was traced out only in the second week of January, M.A.C.A.NO.253 OF 2011 : 2 : 2011. Petitioner asserts that the delay has occurred in the above circumstances. 3. Having perused the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the application, we are not satisfied with the so called explanation offered by the petitioner to condone the inordinate delay. Therefore, the delay petition is dismissed. Consequently the appeal is also dismissed. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q. BARKATH ALI,JUDGE. cl