(Per Shri P.N.Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member)

(1)               Both these appeals are connected appeals arising out of the same judgement and award.  One is filed by the original complainant and another is filed by the opponent Axis Bank.  Today, Adv.Bamne for the Axis Bank has filed an application that they have rightly filed the appeal in the name of the Axis Bank and not by the Manager.  This practice is not disputed by the counsel for the other side in both the appeals.  So we treat that the appeal is properly filed by Axis Bank Ltd.  Since there is delay in filing both the appeals, both the parties have filed applications for delay condonation.  In the appeal filed by Axis Bank Ltd., there is a delay of 9 to 10 days and in the appeal filed by the original complainant; there is a delay of 273 days in filing the appeal.  Since these appeals are arising out of same judgement and award which has been challenged by the parties and since both the appeals are required to be decided on merit, we are inclined to allow these applications for condonation of delay holding that there is sufficient cause in filing the appeals belatedly.  Both these appeals are supported with affidavits, reasons have been given as to why the delay occurred.  Relying on the affidavits, we hold that the Misc.Application No.305/11 and 29/12 are required to be allowed since the delay occurred in filing both the appeals is properly explained in the applications.  We, therefore, pass the following order. 

ORDER

(1)     The application bearing No.305/11 and 29/12 for condonation of delay are allowed.

(2)     Delay stands condoned. 

(3)     No order as to costs.

Pronounced on 29^th October, 2012.