Allowed

Texmaco Ltd. Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Prakash Cotton Mills Ltd.

Bombay HC4 Aug 2006NMA/2271/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay examined the appellant's plea of condonation of delay in filing an appeal. The court held sufficient cause was shown, rejected the grounds of inaction, and granted the request to place the appeal on board for admission.

What did the court decide?

Notice of Motion made absolute; Appeal placed on board for admission on 17.8.2006.

Texmaco Ltd. Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2006)

¶1

: 1 :

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2271 OF 2006
IN
APPEAL (LDG.) NO.500 OF 2006
IN
SUIT NO.1586 OF 1982

¶4

Texmaco Ltd.....Appellant

¶5

V/s.

¶6

Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. ....Respondents

¶7

Mr.F. D’vitre, Senior Counsel i/b Mulla & Mulla & C.
B. & C. for the Appellant.
Mr.Uday Bobde with Mr.Jitendra Ramagade i/b Mr.M.
Subramanian for the Respondents.

¶8

CORAM : DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN &
S.J. VAZIFDAR, JJ.
DATED : 4TH AUGUST, 2006.

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

1.Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the
Appellant and the learned counsel for the Respondents.

¶11

2.By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is
seeking the condonation of delay in filing the present
Appeal on the ground that the Appellant first got the
knowledge of the suit No.1586 of 1982 wherein an
ex-parte decree was passed only on 12.5.2005 when the
Notice under Order XXI Rule 22 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 was served on the Appellant at its
office. Thereafter it appears that the Appellant took

¶12

: 2 :

¶13

out the Notice of Motion to set-aside the ex-parte
decree which also came to be dismissed on 21.4.2006.
Immediately thereafter this Appeal has been preferred.

¶14

3.Having regard to the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, we find sufficient cause is made out.
There is no case of inaction, negligence or want of
bona-fide on the part of the Appellant. Hence, the
Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer
clause (a). Place the above Appeal on board for
admission on 17.8.2006.

Texmaco Ltd. Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Prakash Cotton Mills Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Texmaco Ltd. Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Prakash Cotton Mills Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

sahara india tv network Vs the state of maharashtra and 2 Ors.

s.r. khanna Vs pradeep r. mafatlal and Ors.

Saloni Equipments and Exports Co. Vs Mrs. Thelma Kenneth Peddar and 2 Ors.

Gopal L.Raheja and Anr. Vs Vijay B.Raheja and Ors.

pandurang kashiba dalvi,hon. secretary, modella industries primises co-op soc.ltd-thane Vs m/s modella txtile industries Pvt. Ltd. (in

LIC Housing Finance Ltd. Vs Sadanand Narsappa Mendon