Allowed

Sarangdhar Dudharam Telangrao and 13 Ors. v. the State of Maha. Thru. Secty. and 6 Ors.

Bombay HC8 Oct 2008CA/7448/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bench allowed the condonation of a delay of one year and 105 days in filing an application for restoration of a rejected civil application. The civil application was restored to file.

What did the court decide?

Delay condoned; Rejected Civil Application restored to file; No. 20758/2006 remanded to appropriate Division Bench upon removal of objections.

Sarangdhar Dudharam Telangrao and 13 Ors. Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2008)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.7448/2008

¶4

IN M.C.A. (Revision) St. No.9855/2008

¶5

¶6

REJECTED C.A. NO.317/1007

¶7

Sarangdhar s/o Dudharam Telangrao

¶8

..Versus...

¶9

The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32 and others

¶10

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶11

Court's or Judge's Orders

¶12

[Shri S.C. Gupta, Adv. for applicant] [A.G.P. for respondents-State] [Shri J.T. Gilda, Adv. for R-6]

¶13

CORAM :- A.B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATED :- 08.10.2008

¶14

There is a delay of one year and 105 days in filing application for restoration of Civil Application St. No.20760/2006 (Rejected Civil Application No.317/2007).

¶15

Heard.

¶16

There are good and sufficient grounds mentioned in the application for condonation of delay. Delay is therefore, condoned. Civil Application is allowed.

¶17

¶18

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION ST. NO.9855/2008

¶19

This is an application for restoration of Civil Application St. No.20760/2006 (Rejected Civil Application No.317/2007).

¶20

Heard.

¶21

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Civil Application No.317/2007 is restored to file.

¶22

Misc. Civil Application is disposed of.

¶23

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION ST. NO.20760/2006 (Rejected Civil Application No.317/2007)

¶24

This is an application for condonation of delay in filing Misc. Civil Application (Review) St. No.20758/2006.

¶25

Heard.

¶26

For the reasons stated in the application, this application for condonation of delay is allowed.

¶27

Misc. Civil Application is disposed of.

¶28

¶29

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION ST. NO.20758/2006

¶30

Since all applications have been now decided, this Misc. Civil Application St. No.20758/2006 (Rejected Misc. Civil Application No.318/2007) deserves to be heard for review by the appropriate Division Bench. Hence, place this rejected Misc. Civil Application No.318/20007 for hearing before the appropriate Division Bench.

¶31

Applicants to remove office objections within a period of two weeks from today, failing which all orders shall stand recalled.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

ssw

Sarangdhar Dudharam Telangrao and 13 Ors. v. the State of Maha. Thru. Secty. and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarangdhar Dudharam Telangrao and 13 Ors. v. the State of Maha. Thru. Secty. and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhaskar S/O Shamrao Dhopte Vs Bhaktraj Sewakramji Gaurkhede

Kishore Sukhanandan Mawale Vs Shri Nitin Kumar Khade,Ceo,Zp,Akola and 2 Ors.

Kishore Sukhanandan Mawale Vs Shri Nitin Kumar Khade,Ceo,Zp,Akola and 2 Ors.

Madhukar Jaganath Pillay and Ors. Vs Kuldeep Goyal and 3 Ors.

Shri Parampujya Wakratund Maharaj Kavishwar Sand4. Vs Lilawati Vasantrao Pingle and Another.

Ramesh S/O Ramniwas Modi, Nagpur Vs Surendrasingh S/O Gurudutt Singh Ghatrode, Nagpur and 1 Anor