AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—s Review Petition is filed for review of the judgment dated 28th November 2011, passed in MFA. No. 46/2008, by this Court. long with the Review Petition, the review petitioner has filed I.A.I/2012 for condonation of delay of 110 days in filing the same.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for review petitioner and perused the judgment dated 28th November 2011 under review.
Delay of 110 has been explained at paragraphs 3 to 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the application, I.A.I/2012. It is stated at the said paragraphs that, immediately the clerk was asked to get the certified copy of the judgment under review and on 23-03-2012, the clerk told that he has inadvertently omitted to file copy application. On 24-03-2012, fresh application was filed for issue of copies and they were obtained in first week of April 2012. On instructions of the client and in view of the developments narrated in the review petition, review petitions are filed on 16-04-2012. The limitation for filing review petition is 30 days and the judgment is passed on 28-12-2011 and the review petition ought to have been filed on or before 28-12-2011. The review petition is filed on 16-04-2012 occasioning the delay of 110 days. Since the copy of application is filed beyond 30 days coping delay would not enure to the benefit of the review petitioner. The delay of 110 days is for the bonafide reasons explained above and that the same is unintentional. There is sufficient cause for condonation of delay as otherwise the petitioner would be subjected to hardship and hardship would be caused to the insurer since a similar finding of pay and recovery by MACT is set aside by this Court in M.F.A. No. 8398/2007 and 12725/2008 not disturbing the finding on the quantum as well as the extent of contributory negligence. Further, it is stated that it is just and essential to condone the delay of 108 days in view of the decisions of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in AIR 1997 SC 1353 and AIR 2003 SC 2306. We have perused the statements made in the affidavit filed in support of the I.A. for condonation of delay. There is delay of 110 days in filing the review petition. After going through each and every line of the explanation, it is seen that the explanation offered is not satisfactory and no cogent and sufficient cause is shown. The explanation offered is bald in nature and in a very casual manner. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the delay offered cannot be accepted nor any credibility can be given to the same. Hence, the explanation offered by the review petitioner is liable to be rejected. Further, it is seen that the affidavit, explaining the delay has been filed by the counsel who represented the review petitioner in the appeal and not by the party. Therefore, I.A.I/2012 is dismissed as devoid of merit on ground of delay and laches. Consequently, the review petition filed by petitioner is dismissed.