Allowed

Dr. B. B. Paul and Ors. v. Lalitkumar Dwarkadas Chapsey and Ors.

Bombay HC25 Feb 2008WP/1011/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order disposing of a writ petition seeking restoration of an appeal. The court set aside the impugned order dismissing the application and allowed it on consent without recording reasons, directing expeditious disposal of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; application for restoration allowed; respondents in the appeal to be served within 8 weeks; appeal to be decided within 4 months.

Dr. B. B. Paul and Ors. Vs Lalitkumar… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2008)

¶1

 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.:

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE

¶3

 WRIT PETITION NO.1011 OF 2008

¶4

 ------------------------------------:----------------------------------
 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Court’s or Judge’s orders.
 coram, appearances, Court’s orders :
 or directions and Registrar’s :
 orders. :

¶5

 ------------------------------------:-----------------------------------

¶6

 Mr.P.K.Dhakephalkar, senior counsel, for
 the petitioners.

¶7

 Mr N.Jaynarayan, for respondent nos 1
 and 2.

¶8

 CORAM: D.B.Bhosale,J.
 DATED: 25.02.2008
P.C.:

¶9

 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶10

 Rule. Mr.Jaynarayan,learned counsel,
 waives service for respondent nos.1 and 2.

¶11

 By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith
 and heard finally.

¶12

 The petitioners have impugned an order
 dated 28.11.2007 passed by the Addl.Chief
 Judge of Small Causes Court at Bombay, on the
 application at Exhibit 13 in Appeal No.185 of
 2005, by which the prayer made by the
 petitioners for restoration of the appeal,

¶13

 which came to be dismissed vide order dated
 7.6.2007 passed against respondent nos 3 to

¶14

 7, has been rejected. Learned counsel for

¶15

 the parties have fairly stated that I need
 not record reasons for disposing of this writ
 petition and they have agreed for the
 following order.

¶16

 (i) The order impugned in the writ
 petition dated 28.11.2007 is set aside and
 the application at Exhibit-13 filed by the
 petitioners is allowed in terms of prayer
 clauses (a) and (b). The petitioners to take
 steps to serve all the respondents in Appeal
 No.185 of 2005 pending before the Court of
 Small causes at Bombay within eight weeks
 from today. The Small Causes Court shall
 decide the said appeal as expeditiously as
 possible and preferably within a period of

¶17

 four months from the date of service on all
 the respondents in the appeal on merits in
 accordance with law. All contentions of the
 parties are kept open. The writ petition is
 disposed of.

¶18

 (D.B.Bhosale, J.)

Dr. B. B. Paul and Ors. v. Lalitkumar Dwarkadas Chapsey and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. B. B. Paul and Ors. v. Lalitkumar Dwarkadas Chapsey and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sherbanoo Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs Indira H. Vithalani Alias I.H.Vithalani and Anr.

Lilawati Chandrakant Pawar Vs Nashik Zilla Mahila Vikas Sahkari Bank and Ors.

Smt. Alka @ Prabhavati P. Gawade Vs Smt. Bhimabai N. Raut

The Kolhapur Maratha Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs Balkrushna Babaso Pawar-Medhe and Ors.

Veena Dushyant Malgonkar Vs Vimlaben Gosalia and Anr.

Shabbir Hatimali Bootawala Vs State Govt.of Maharashtra and Ors.