- (1.) Heard Sri S.K. Awasthi, learned counsel for the appellant in F.A.F.O. No. 1236 of 2007. Sri B.C. Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant i.e. the Oriental Insurance Company in F.A.F.O. No. 745 of 2006, Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the owner and driver of the offending Truck in both the appeals.
(2.) Both the appeals arise out of the award dated 13.07.2006 passed by the MACT/ADJ, Court No. 2, Hardoi whereby in C.P. No. 110 of 1999, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,54,500/- along with 6% interest per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of its actual payment in favour of the claimant. The F.A.F.O. No. 1236 of 2007 has been preferred by the claimant seeking enhancement along with an application for condonation of delay whereas F.A.F.O. No. 745 of 2006 has been preferred by the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. assailing the award on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license, consequently, the liability could not have been saddled on the Insurance Company. It is in this backdrop that both the appeals have been heard and are being decided by this common judgment.
(3.) The Court has considered the application for condonation of delay in filing the F.A.F.O. No. 1236 of 2007. The appeal is delayed by about one year and one month and the ground shown in the affidavit filed by Sri Raj Bahadur Singh is that he did not have the information regarding the decision of the Claims Tribunal nor he was informed of the same by its counsel. It has further been stated that it is only when the Oriental Insurance Company preferred the Appeal bearing F.A.F.O. No. 745 of 2006 and upon the appellant being served did he come to know of the aforesaid decision and thereafter the instant appeal has been preferred which for the reason aforesaid was delayed by one year and one month and such the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause, accordingly, the delay be condoned.;