NHAI Vs. Kaushalya Devi (Deceased) through LR OMP(M) No.71 of 2024 11.07.2025 Present: Ms. Sneh Bhimta, Advocate, for the applicant/ appellant. Mr. Yuyutsu Singh Thakur, Advocate, for the respondent. OMP(M) No.75 & 76 of 2025 Sh. Yuyutsu Singh Thakur, learned counsel has put in appearance for the proposed legal representative of the deceased respondent and has explained the reasons for his non-appearance before the learned Deputy Registrar (Judicial). 2. In view of submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the proposed legal representative, he is permitted to participate in the present proceedings. Order dated 30.05.2025 is recalled to that extent. 3. These applications have been moved under Order 22 Rule 4 & 9 read with Section 151 C.P.C. for bringing on record legal representative of deceased respondent- Kaushalya Devi and also under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in moving the application. Sole respondent-Kaushalya Devi is stated to have died on 18.11.2020. In terms of the averments made in the application, the deceased had left behind the sole legal representative as detailed in para 3 of the application. The applicant has cogently explained the delay in moving the application. The application and the prayers made therein are not opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the legal heir of deceased respondent. 4. In view of the above, these applications are allowed. Delay in moving the application for bringing on record the legal representative of deceased respondent is condoned. Abatement, if any, is set aside. Legal representative of the deceased respondent, detailed in para 3 of the application, is ordered to be brought on record. Amended memo of parties be taken on record. Registry is directed to carry out necessary corrections in the cause title. The applications stand disposed of. OMP(M) No.71 of 2024 5. Applicant/appellant seeks condonation of 152 days’ delay in instituting the main appeal. The applicant has pleaded that the impugned judgment was pronounced by the learned District Judge on 04.09.2023. Its certified copy was applied on 06.09.2023. The same was attested on 30.09.2023 and was delivered on 07.10.2023. However, disposal of the case on 04.09.2023 was not within the knowledge of the applicant as the same was never intimated to it by its counsel. 6. The application is with the further averments that the applicant became aware on 21.03.2024 about the disposal of the main case on 04.09.2023. On account of closing of the financial year, the empanelled counsel for the applicant throughout the State of H.P. were directed to furnish the information of the pendency or otherwise of the cases of the appellant. That it is only thereafter the applicant came to know about the fact that the instant case had been disposed of on 04.09.2023. However, this fact was not brought to the notice of the applicant by its counsel. 7. The applicant further submits that due to such inefficient and lackadaisical attitude of the said law firm/counsel, M/s M.V. Kini & Co., 362 cases pending in District Mandi have been withdrawn and had been allotted to some other firm. 8. The reasons for delay in filing the appeal have been attributed upon having no information about disposal of the case from the counsel conducting the said case. The applicant has demonstrated its bona fide by pleading that it has already withdrawn its cases from the law firm conducting the aforesaid cases. 9. Even otherwise, there is no opposition to the prayer made in the application. For the cogent reasons given and established in the application, the delay in filing the main appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. Arb. Appeal No. of 2025 10. Be registered. List for consideration after six weeks. OMP No. of 2025 (OMPST No.18570/2024) 11. Heard. Subject to deposit of entire awarded amount alongwith up to date interest in the Registry of this Court within four weeks, operation and execution of order dated 04.09.2023, passed by the learned District Judge Bilaspur, H.P. in Arbitration Case No.56 of 2018 (National Highways Authority of India Versus Kaushalaya Devi), shall remain stayed. The application stands disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 11, 2025 Judge Mukesh