IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 2322 of 2010()
1. K.V.JOSEPH, S/O. VAREED, KARIYATTI HOUSE
... Petitioner
Vs
1. T.C.SUNIL, PROPRIETOR,
... Respondent
2. TITTO BABY MANJOORAN, S/O. BABY
3. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE
For Petitioner :SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :23/11/2010
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C.M.Appln.No.3007 of 2010 &
M.A.C.A.No.2322 OF 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2010
JUDGMENT
Basheer, J.
The prayer in this application filed under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act is to condone the delay of 364 days in filing the appeal.
2. The impugned award was passed by the Tribunal on June 9,
2009. But according to the petitioner/appellant, he had gone to
Bangalore in connection with the admission of his daughter to the BDS
course. He had been desperately trying to raise funds for her
admission. Further, he was taken ill in Bangalore and was undergoing
treatment. That was also an added reason for his being not able to take
steps for filing the appeal. But curiously, petitioner has a case that he
was “unable to take care of himself” due to the disability suffered as a
result of the injury. Petitioner has not stated the period during which
he was in Bangalore or what was the disease he was afflicted with
while he was in Bangalore. What has been stated is only that he came
MACA.No.2322/2010 2
back from Bangalore on August 26, 2010.
We have carefully perused the averments in the affidavit filed in
support of the application for condonation of delay. We are not at all
satisfied with the so called explanation offered by the petitioner.
Therefore, the delay petition is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is
also dismissed.
A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE
P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE
sv.
MACA.No.2322/2010 2