Shindo Devi & Ors. Vs. Pardeep Sharma & ors. CMP(M) No.1716 of 2023 14.05.2025 Present: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate for the applicants. Respondents No.1 and 2, ex parte. Mr. Jagidsh Thakur, Advocate, for respondent No.3. CMP(M) No.1716 of 2023 Rejoinder not filed. This application has been filed for condonation of delay in filing appeal against the award passed by the MACT. Prayer for condonation of delay has been opposed on behalf of contesting respondent No.3 by filing reply. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 has also submitted that day-to-day delay, as required to be explained under law, has not been explained and, therefore, application deserves to be dismissed. It has been submitted on behalf of the applicant that two claim petitions arising out of the same accident were being pursued by one and the same Advocate. In one case, claim petition was filed on behalf of the injured/Gurjeet Singh whereas claim petition in the present matter was filed by the dependent legal heirs of the deceased/Vijay Kumar. It has been further submitted that Insurance Company has preferred appeal in another matter wherein cross-objection for enhancement of the compensation was filed, whereas in present matter no appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the present case, the appeal could not be filed for the advise rendered by the counsel, as it was advised by the counsel that on filing of the appeal by the Insurance Company, cross- objection for enhancement of compensation can be filed. However, in present matter, Insurance Company did not prefer any appeal and in these circumstances neither appeal was preferred by the present applicant nor in absence of appeal of Insurance Company, cross objection could be filed. Now, in aforesaid facts, present appeal has been preferred with this application on the basis of fresh advice of counsel to file independent appeal for enhancement of the compensation. It has been submitted that the applicants/appellants are depending upon the advise of the expert and there is no lapse on their part and they have acted with due diligence by approaching the counsel for taking steps for enhancement of the compensation. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that sufficient cause is made out which prevented the applicant from filing the appeal within time. In view of the above, delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Appeal be registered. Application is allowed and disposed of. FAO No._______of 2025 (FAOST No.28517 of 2023) Admit. Post admission notice be issued to the respondents No.1 and 2, returnable on next date of hearing, on taking steps within one week. Records be requisitioned. List for further orders on 28.07.2025. (Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge May 14, 2025 (Rupsi)