Hon'ble BHAGWATI, J.—None of the Advocates has been appearing in the Court today. 2. The matter comes up on an application filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, wherein the appellant has beseeched to condone the delay of 1029 days in filing the instant appeal. 3. Service of notice is complete on the respondents, but none appears on their behalf. 4. Having perused the contents of Limitation application, it is noticed that the award was passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beawar on 11th March, 2005. The appellant submitted that the summon was not served upon him properly and the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal passed the award ex-parte in his absence. When he got the knowledge of the award having been passed by the Tribunal in the month of December, 2008, he enquired the matter and soon thereafter filed the appeal. The delay has been unintentional. 5. It is relevant to record that the appellant is expected to explain each day's delay, but he has not explained even one day's delay, whereas the appeal is found to have been filed after an inordinate delay of 1029 days i.e. approximately after three years. Hence, on account of there being no satisfactory and reasonable cause in filing the appeal after an inordinate delay of 1029 days, the application deserves to be dismissed and the same stands dismissed accordingly. 6. Consequent upon the dismissal of application filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, the appeal as also the stay application, both, do not survive and the they stand dismissed accordingly.