rsk 1 27-FA-ST-36098-13.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2977 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.36098 OF 2013 WITH FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.36098 OF 2013 Mr. Rajiya Tahir Kureshi And Ors ...Applicants/Appellants (Original Claimants) Versus Shri Sanjay Appasaheb Swami And Ors. .…Respondents (Original Respondents) _____________________________________________________________ None for the Applicants/ Appellants. Ms. Renuka Yadav i/b Ms. Jyoti Bajpayee for Respondent No.2. _____________________________________________________________ CORAM : JITENDRA JAIN, J. DATED : 28th APRIL 2026 P. C. : CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2977 OF 2014 1. None for the applicants. 2. This application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 1 year and 171 days i.e. 536 days in filing the appeal to challenge the order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nashik (Tribunal) dated 2 March 2012. 3. The reasons for the delay is given in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the RAJESHWARI SUBODH KARVE Digitally signed by RAJESHWARI SUBODH KARVE Date: 2026.04.29 13:52:50 +0530 rsk 2 27-FA-ST-36098-13.doc Civil Application. Briefly, the reasons states that the applicants were awaiting for the receipt of awarded sum and further respondent No.4- Ishrath Begam Sharif Kureshi has been ailing and therefore the applicants were required to attend to her in the hospital from time to time. It is in these circumstances that the applicants could not get in touch with their advocate to give instructions to file the appeal. 4. I have considered the application. 5. Ishrath Begam Sharif Kureshi is added as respondent No.4 in the present application. It is not the case made out in the application that any of the three applicants were unwell nor it is the case made out that all the three were attending to respondent No.4-Ishrath Begam Sharif Kureshi. In any case, except a bald statement nothing has been annexed to show that during the limitation period and thereafter respondent No.4-Ishrath Begam Sharif Kureshi was ailing. It is important to note that the original application has been filed in time and therefore the reason that the family was disturbed also cannot be accepted. 6. In my view, in the absence of any sufficient cause not supported by any documentary evidence, the cause shown in the application cannot be accepted as “sufficient cause”. Civil Application is dismissed. Consequently, Appeal also stands dismissed. [ JITENDRA JAIN, J. ]