No. 3/29.10.2009.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

Revision Petitioner through Mr. M. P. Chakraborty, the Ld. Advocate and O.P. through Mr. Falguni Bandhopadhyay, the Ld. Advocate are present.  O.P. files Written Objection against petition for condonation of delay.  Heard the Ld. Advocate in support of the application for condonation of delay and Mr. Bandhopadhyay, the Ld. Advocate opposing the application.  It appears that this application was filed for condonation of delay of 180 days in filing revision petition challenging the order dated 27.02.2009.  On perusal of the application we find that the reason given for such long delay in preferring a revision application has been explained in the petition giving dates and narrating the circumstances.  The main explanation is as regards loss of file for a long period between 28.02.2009 and 08.07.2009.  It is not apparent even after obtaining the impugned order that it was passed in a contested proceeding and thereafter such long delay has occurred for more than four months stating that the file was missing from the Office of the Insurance Co.  No explanation at all has been given why the Ld. Advocate and Officer dealing with the matter could not initiate a search.  No fact has been stated how the file was obtained and on whose effort.  No attempt has also been made to state as to the Officer who was responsible for such delay and missing of the file and what action was taken against him.  In such circumstances such vague explanation for delay of more than four months does not appear to be acceptable.  As we do not accept the explanation as correct in absence of any supporting materials the application is dismissed.  The Forum below is at liberty to hear the proceeding in accordance with law granting all the parties opportunities, as they are entitled under the law.   Accordingly the revision petition is also dismissed.