High Court Bombay disposed of a civil application for condonation of delay of 49 days in filing a family court appeal. The appellate court found the delay properly explained in the affidavit and condoned it, allowing the matter to proceed.
Delay of 49 days was condoned and matter to proceed further.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
:1:
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION (M) NO. 19 OF 2005.
IN
FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO. 861 OF
2005.
Smt. Vinamala D. Dimble.
..Applicant.
Versus.
Dayanand D. Dimble.
..Respondent.
Mr. R.A.Sawant i/b R.S. Kate and Vijayrao Kale for the applicants.
Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh i/b Mr. Sanjay Kshirsagar for the respondents.
CORAM: S.B.MHASE &
S.R.SATHE JJ
DATE: JULY 11, 2005.
P.C.
| Kshirsa | gar for |
the | respond | ent. | Thi | s is |
civil | application | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| for | condonation | of | delay. | We | heard | Mr. | R.A.S | awant | i/b |
| Vijayra | o Kale |
for | the | applica | nt. | This i |
s an |
application | |
| for | condoning the |
delay | of |
49 | days. | The | respon |
dent | opposed |
| for | condonation | of | delay. | H | owever, | on | perusal | of | the |
| applicat | ion and |
affi | davit, | we | are | satisfied | that | the | delay |
| is | properly | explaine | d. | The | refore, | delay | is | condoned. |
Matter to proceed further. Civil application is
accordingly disposed of.
(S.R.SATHE,J.)
(S.B.MHASE, J.)
:srp/2005/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether delay in filing family court appeal warranting condonation was properly explained.
Vinamala D. Dimble
Dayanand D. Dimble
S.B. MHASE
S.R. SATHE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
