Judgment · High Court

MC 3891/2007 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C. UPADHYAY Heard Mr. SK Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner. Seen the report of the Registry regarding the service of notice upon the Respond ent No.1. It appears that the registered letter issued to Respondent No.1 has n ot been returned back after due service. In view of the above, notice upon the Respondent No.1 is deemed to be served under Order 5 Rule 9(v) of CPC. None appears for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 despite service of notice. By this application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act, the petitioner has prayed for c on donation of delay of 180 days in preferring the connected appeal against the j udgement and order dated 4.7.06 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation , Nagaon in WC Case No.93/99. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that f or the reasons given in the application, the petitioner could not prefer the con nected appeal in time. Considering the matter in its entirety, accepting the reasons given for the cond onation of delay, the delay of 180 days in preferring the appeal is hereby condo ned. Misc. case stands disposed of.