Single judge allowed a Civil Application for restoration of a Second Appeal dismissed in default, condoning a 213-day delay.
The Civil Application was allowed restoring the Second Appeal.
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.
ssm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 666 OF 2008
IN
SECOND APPEAL NO. 1089 OF 2006
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda
of Coram, appearances, Court’s
Orders or directions and
Registrar’s OrdersCourt’s or Judge’s Orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.M.L.Patil for the Applicants.
None for the Respondent.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.
DATED : 29th April, 2008
P.C.
. This is an application for
restoration of the Second Appeal
which was dismissed in default on
20/07/2007. There is a delay of
213 days in filing the present
Civil Application. In view of
paragraphs 3,4 and 5 I am of the
view that sufficient case is made
out to condone the delay. The
Civil Application is,
accordingly, allowed in terms of
prayer clauses (a) and (b).
2. The Civil Application is
allowed, accordingly.
( 2 )
[ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.]
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a delay of 213 days in filing a Civil Application for restoration of a Second Appeal should be condoned.
Applicants
Respondent
Anoop V. Mohta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court