Sanjay Misra, J. - (1.) THIS is an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Notice was issued on this application. The respondent No. 7 has put in appearance through Sri Viqar Ahmad Ansari, Advocate and in view of the office report dated 1.10.2011, notice on the other respondents was deemed sufficient. Sri Viqar Ahmad Ansari, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7 (Oriental Insurance Company) has filed his counter affidavit in the condonation of delay matter.
(2.) HEARD Sri S.K. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Viqar Ahmad Ansari, learned counsel for the respondent. The stamp reporter has reported that this appeal is beyond time by 8 years and 157 days. Learned counsel for the appellant has referred to the affidavit filed in support of the condonation of delay application to state that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhansi decided the claim of the claimant -respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 by its judgement and order dated 06.09.2002 whereagainst the appellant who is owner of the vehicle filed a review petition on 7.10.2002, which was ultimately dismissed on 4.4.2011. Learned counsel for the appellant states thereafter on 11.5.2011 i.e. within 90 days of 4.4.2011 he has filed this appeal and therefore, the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act be granted to him since he was bonafide pursuing a remedy against the impugned award.
(3.) SRI Viqar Ahmad Ansari, learned counsel for the respondent has relied on paragraph 8 of his counter affidavit to state that even the review petition was dismissed in default on 2.9.2006 and recall application was filed in the year 2010, therefore, the benefit of Section 14 or Section 5 of the Limitation Act can not be granted to the appellant.;