Delay in refiling company appeal not condoned where medical explanation was unsubstantiated and multiple appellants could have supported it.

A delay of 471 days in refiling a company appeal was not condoned because the explanation was prolonged, occurred in multiple spells, and was unsupported by material evidence. Medical complications of one appellant were found insufficient, as the appeal involved several appellants and the surviving appellants could have supported the application. In the absence of proof of the alleged condition's nature or duration, the explanation was held neither substantiated nor plausible, and condonation was rejected, resulting in dismissal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of 471 days in refiling the company appeal deserved condonation.

Analysis: The delay was prolonged and occurred in multiple spells. The explanation based on the medical complications of one appellant was found insufficient because the appeal involved several appellants, including surviving appellants who could have supported the application, and no supporting material was produced to establish the nature or duration of the alleged medical condition. The explanation was therefore held to be neither substantiated nor plausible.

Conclusion: Condonation of delay in refiling was rejected, and the appeal consequently stood dismissed.

---