No. 4/24.11.2010.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA, PRESIDENT.

Appellant through Mr. Pralay Kar, the Ld. Advocate, Respondent No. 1 through Mrs. Suman Sehanabis, the Ld. Advocate and Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 through Mr. Aloke Mukhopadhyay, the Ld. Advocate are present. 

This appeal has been filed out of time by about 224 days.  This application has been filed for condonation of the aforesaid delay in filing this appeal.  The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. is the Appellant.  The impugned order was passed on 05.10.2009.  It has been stated in the above application that the Ld. Advocate on record who appeared before the Forum below immediately contacted the Divisional Manager of Siliguri Divisional Office about the said order.  The said Ld. Advocate also informed and advised the Siliguri Divisional Office of the Insurance Company – Appellant that there are good grounds for preferring an appeal.  Thereafter, the certified copy of the said order was applied for only on 15.03.2010 i.e. after expiry of more than five months.  It has been stated in the above application that the said Ld. Advocate was out of station and was suffering from illness for a prolong period for which the certified copy could not be applied for earlier.  No document has been annexed to the above application showing that the Ld. Advocate was suffering from any illness during the period from 05.10.2009 till 15.03.2010.  Furthermore, the Siliguri Divisional Office having been informed about the said order it ought to have taken steps for applying for the certified copy immediately thereafter through any other clerk without waiting for the said Ld. Advocate if she had suffered from any illness during that period.  In the absence of any proof of illness of the said Ld. Advocate for the aforesaid period from 05.10.2009 till 15.03.2010 we are of the view that the Appellant was guilty of negligence and laches in not acting in due diligence after the impugned order was passed by the Forum below.  We are, therefore, of the view that the delay should not be condoned on the above averments so made in the above application.  The application for condonation of delay is accordingly dismissed.  The appeal shall stand dismissed as being barred by limitation.