B. J. SHETHNA, J. ( 1 ) THE applicant - United Insurance Co. Ltd. has filed this application and prayed to condone gross delay of 355 days in preferring the above First Appeal (Stamp) No. 3039 of 2002 filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 14. 6. 2001 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Rajkot in claim Petition No. 518/89 filed by the respondent claimant. According to the applicant, it came to know about the impugned judgment and award by letter dated 13. 8. 2002 of their Advocate Shri C. D. Mankad (Annexure-A ). ( 2 ) IT is stated in the application that the applicant applied for the certified copy of the judgment and award on 4. 9. 2002 which was ready and delivered on the same day i. e. on 4. 9. 2002. But, the appeal was presented on 2. 9. 2002 i. e. two days prior to it. ( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel Shri Nanavati appearing for the applicant - Insurance Company heavily relying upon letter dated 13. 8. 2002 (Annexure-A) addressed by their Advocate shri C. D. Mankad to the address to the Divisional Manger of the Company at Rajkot and submitted that their Advocate had already sent his opinion on 25. 6. 2001, but the same was not received by the Company as it was lost in transit. Therefore, he forwarded all the relevant papers, along with his letter dated 13. 8. 2002. He submitted that as soon as the papers were received by the Insurance Company, without wasting any further time it filed the appeal. He, therefore, submitted that in the interest of justice delay of 355 days be condoned. ( 4 ) THIS submission of Mr. Nanavati cannot be accepted because in letter dated 13. 8. 2002 addressed by Advocate Shri C. D. Mankad he had never stated in his letter that certified copy of judgment along with his opinion dated 25. 6. 2001 were lost in transit. He simply stated that his opinion dated 25. 6. 2001 was not received by the company, nothing more than that is stated in the letter. ( 5 ) INITIALLY, Mr. Nanavati had submitted that along with his letter dated 13. 8. 2002 they received all relevant papers including certified copy of the judgment and award and as soon as the same was received they filed appeal before this Court on 2. ( 5 ) INITIALLY, Mr. Nanavati had submitted that along with his letter dated 13. 8. 2002 they received all relevant papers including certified copy of the judgment and award and as soon as the same was received they filed appeal before this Court on 2. 9. 2002. But when it was pointed out to him that on behalf of applicant - Insurance Company certified copy of the impugned judgment and award applied only on 4. 9. 2002, which was ready and received by them on the same day i. e. on 4. 9. 2002. then he was not able to press his argument any further. ( 6 ) THUS, we are of the considered opinion that the applicant - Insurance Company has miserably failed to show any cause much less sufficient cause for condoning gross delay of 355 days in filing the above appeal late. When the applicant - insurance Company has not come before the Court with clean hands, then even if the Insurance Company had any case on merits then also we would not have entertained this application for condonation of delay, because law on this point is very well settled that parties, who do not come before the Court with clean hands are not entitled for any relief much less discretionary reliefs from the Court. In view of the above discussion, this application fails and is summarily dismissed. .