The High Court of Bombay dismissed a writ petition challenging the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appeal Court's order condoning delay. The judge held the factual finding was not perverse, making it unsuitable for writ intervention, and rejected the petition summarily.
Writ Petition rejected summarily.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 6911 OF 2002
The Nasik District Central Co-op.
Bank Limited .. Petitioner
versus
Mr.Pruthviraj N. Kor & ors. .. Respondents
Mr.N.N. Bhadrashete for the petitioner.
CORAM : D.G.KARNIK, J
DATED : 23rd April 2007.
P.C.:
1. Heard.
2. By this petition, the petitioner challenges
the judgement and order dated 31st July 2002 passed
by the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appeal Court
condoning the delay in filing of an appeal against
the order of the Co-operative Court Nashik passed in
Case no.ABN No.1500 of 1999.
3. The appellate court has recorded a finding
of fact that there was sufficient cause for
condonation of the delay. Whether there was a
sufficient cause for condonation of delay or not is a
question of fact and no perversity in the finding of
fact recorded by the appeal court is seen. In the
circumstances, this is not a fit case for exercise of
a writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, Writ Petition is
rejected summarily.
(D.G. KARNIK, J)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ jurisdiction should be exercised to challenge the Appellate Court's finding on sufficient cause for condoning delay in filing an appeal.
The Nasik District Central Co-op. Bank Limited
Mr.Pruthviraj N. Kor & ors.
D.G.Karnik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court