Madras High Court
The Superintendent Engineer vs Minor.Santhosh Mohan on 24 January, 2020
Author: V.M.Velumani
Bench: V.M.Velumani
M.P.No.2 of 2011 and
C.M.A.SR.No.73723 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.01.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
M.P.No.2 of 2011
and
C.M.A.SR.No.73723 of 2010
The Superintendent Engineer,
Highways Department,
Kancheepuram. .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.Minor.Santhosh Mohan
(represented by his mother and natural
guardian Geetha Sadagopan)
2.Geetha Sadagopan
3.S.Jagadambal Ammal
4.M.Muthuramalingam
5.New India Assurance Company Limited,
Raja Rajeswari Tower, 4th Floor, 28/30,
Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai,
Chennai – 600 004. .. Respondents
PRAYER: M.P.No.2 of 2011 is filed under Section 173(1) of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to condone the delay of 976 days in filing
the above appeal.
1/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
M.P.No.2 of 2011 and
C.M.A.SR.No.73723 of 2010
C.M.A.SR.No.73723 of 2010 is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated
29.08.2007 made in M.C.O.P.No.1711 of 2004 on the file of Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, IV small Causes Court, Chennai.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Devnarenderan
Government Advocate
ORDER
This Miscellaneous Petition is filed to condone the delay of 976 days in filing the above C.M.A.SR.No.73723 of 2010, which is filed against the judgment and decree dated 29.08.2007 made in M.C.O.P.No.1711 of 2004 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, IV small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.Heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the petitioner and perused the entire materials on record.
3.According to the petitioner, due to administrative reason, delay of 976 days has occurred. The petitioner-Highways Department is not diligent enough to prosecute the case. The 2/5 http://www.judis.nic.in M.P.No.2 of 2011 and C.M.A.SR.No.73723 of 2010 reason given by the petitioner is not valid and sufficient for condoning delay of 976 days. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to condone the delay. Accordingly, M.P.No.2 of 2011 stands dismissed and consequently, C.M.A.SR.No.73723 of 2010 is rejected at the SR stage itself. No costs.
24.01.2020 krk To
1.The IV Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.
3/5http://www.judis.nic.in M.P.No.2 of 2011 and C.M.A.SR.No.73723 of 2010 V.M.VELUMANI, J.
krk M.P.No.2 of 2011 and C.M.A.SR.No.73723 of 2010 24.01.2020 4/5 http://www.judis.nic.in