PRADEEP KANT, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the appellant Mr. R.S. Tripathi and learned Counsel for the respondents Mr. Rajendra Jaiswal.
(2.) THIS is first appeal from order arising out of proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act awarding compensation to the respondent-claimants because of death of the husband of Smt. Raj Kumari, as a result of an accident, which had taken place between the jeep of the State and the motor cycle of the deceased. The appeal is barred by limitation, and therefore, the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal has also been moved. Against the aforesaid application, the objections duly supported by an affidavit, have been filed by the respondents. Admittedly, the limitation in filing the appeal was upto 29.8.2001. The appeal has been filed on 19.9.2002. In the application for condonation of delay, it has been stated that the impugned order was applied for on 6.7.2001, which was received by the State on 11.7.2001. On 19.7.2001, a letter was written from the office of the District Magistrate, Unnao to the State Government asking for permission to file appeal. Reminders are also said to have been Sent on 7.9.2001, 5.12.2001, 27.3.2001 and 11.4.2002. The Joint Legal Remembrancer, Government of Uttar Pradesh granted permission on 17.4.2002. On 22.4.2002, the District Magistrate, Unnao requested the Chief Standing Counsel for filing the appeal for which the official/officer also contacted the office of the Chief Standing Counsel on 26.4.2002. The Chief Standing Counsel marked the case on that very date to one of the Standing Counsel, but the official/officer contacted the Standing Counsel on 30.4.2002. Thereafter as per averments made in the affidavit certain documents were asked for, were provided on 6.5.2002, but the complete record was provided to the Standing Counsel on 10.5.2002. It has again been stated that since the financial approval was not forthcoming, which matter was in progress, the official/officer was asked to file the appeal, which had already been prepared at the earliest along with an application for grant of time to comply with Section 173(1) proviso (i) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to avoid any further delay as the Court was going to be closed due to the Summer Vacation. The official was authorised to swear the affidavit. However, the official/officer contacted the Standing Counsel on 24.5.2002 cui which date, affidavit was sworn. The appeal was however filed on 19.9.2002. In the objection filed by the respondents, certain copies of the application and affidavits have been annexed, filed by the District authorities. In an application dated 30.5.2002, it has been stated that no appeal has been filed by the State Government against the award and one month's time as asked for making deposit under the award. This application was duly supported by an affidavit of the Naib Tehsildar. Again on 16.7.2002, one moth's further time was asked for by the State for making deposit. Again on 16.8.2002, one more opportunity was asked for, for making the payment.
(3.) AGAINST the objection filed by the respondents, copy of which was served upon the Standing Counsel on 2.12.2002, no rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the State.;