Shyam Shankar Tiwari, J.:- Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 209953 of 2008 The present Appeal has been filed against the Award dated 17.5.2008. 2. The Appeal was got reported on 2.9.2008. As per the Report of the Stamp Reporter dated 2.9.2008, the Appeal was in-time upto 21.8.2008, and thus, the same was beyond time by 12 days on the date of reporting. 3. The Appeal was presented on 3.9.2008. 4. The aforementioned Delay Condonation Application was filed with the Appeal. 5. By the order dated 5.9.2008, notice was directed to be issued on the aforementioned Delay Condonation Application. 6. By the order dated 25.8.2010, service of notice on the respondent nos. 1 to 5 in respect of the Delay Condonation Application was deemed to be sufficient. The Office has submitted its Report dated 21.9.2010, interalia, stating that no one has put-in appearance on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 5 despite service of notice on the said respondents having been deemed to be sufficient. 7. In the circumstances, the Court is proceeding to consider the aforementioned Delay Condonation Application. 8. The aforementioned Delay Condonation Application is supported by an affidavit, sworn by Rehan Ahmad, stated to be posted as Senior Assistant in the Appellant-Insurance Company. 10. Reasons for the delay in filing the Appeal have been explained in paragraphs 3 to 11 of the aforesaid affidavit accompanying the aforementioned Delay Condonation Application. The said paragraphs of the affidavit are reproduced below: "3. That vide order dated 17.5.2008 claim petition of the claimant was allowed. 4. That the counsel of civil court informed to the concerned office of the appellant about passing of the award which requested to the counsel to send the certified copy of the award and formal order. 5. That the counsel of the civil court applied for certified copy of award and formal order on 5.6.2008 which was prepared on the same day and was received by him on 10.6.2008, all the papers were sent by him to the concerned office of the Appellant. 6. That the matter was considered by officials of the concerned office (Noida) and requested to Kailash Chand Investigator to submit report about the criminal case and the accident who submitted his report on 9.7.2008. 7. That after getting the investigation report, the matter was duly considered and it was recommended that appeal should be filed against the award dated 17.05.2008. That the matter was considered by officials of the concerned office (Noida) and requested to Kailash Chand Investigator to submit report about the criminal case and the accident who submitted his report on 9.7.2008. 7. That after getting the investigation report, the matter was duly considered and it was recommended that appeal should be filed against the award dated 17.05.2008. In the last week of July the file was sent to the competent Authority seeking permission to file the appeal. The permission was granted in the IInd week of August and the file was sent to the concerned office at Noida. 8. That the amount to prepare Bank draft of Rs. 25000/- was sanctioned on 12.8.08 and after getting the Bank draft on 13.8.2008 the file was sent to legal Cell Allahabad for filing the appeal. 9. That the file was received by legal Cell Allahabad on 25.8.2008. 10. That on 26.8.2008 the case was entrusted to Sri Arun Kumar Shukla Advocate who drafted the appeal from 26.8.2008 to 27.8.2008 it was given for typing on 29.8.2008 and was received on 31.8.2008. 11. That the appeal was prepared on 1.9.2008 and is being filed without any further delay." 11. As noted above, no one has put-in appearance on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 5 despite service of notice on the said respondents having been deemed to be sufficient. Therefore, the averments made in the aforementioned Delay Condonation Application and its supporting affidavit remain uncontroverted. 12. Having regard to the averments made in the above-quoted paragraphs of the affidavit and having considered the submissions made by Shri A.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant, we are satisfied that sufficient cause has been made out for the delay in filing the Appeal. 13. Therefore, the aforementioned Delay Condonation Application deserves to be allowed, and the same is accordingly allowed. The delay in filing the Appeal is condoned. Let appropriate regular number be given to the Appeal. List for admission on 21.10.2010.