Allowed

Ambika Dilip Kamble and Ors. v. Sunita Suryakantrao Kamble and Ors.

Bombay HC15 Jul 2009CA/1899/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court restored the appeal against Respondent No.3, condoning the delay caused by inability to furnish a fresh address. Service waived by respondent's counsel. Case to be disposed of at admission stage; interim protection extended.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is restored against Respondent No.3; delay is condoned; interim protection continues until the next date; appeal to be disposed of on the admitted facts.

Ambika Dilip Kamble and Ors. Vs Sunita… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶3

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

¶4

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda|Court's or Judges' orders
of Coram, appearanes, Court's|
orders or directions and |
Registrar's orders|

¶5

Shri Kadam Adv. h/f Shri A.D. Aghav, Adv.
for the applicant.
Shri S.B. Choudhari,Adv. for the Respondent.

¶6

--------------------------------------------
C.A. NO.1899/2009 IN C.A.NO.1329/08 IN F.A.
ST.NO.1702/2008.

¶7

1)Heard counsel extensively. The
failure to furnish fresh address of the
Respondent No.3 in the given time till 7th
July, 2008, resulted in dismissal of the
appeal as against the Resp.No.3. The
grounds are indicated in paragraph 2 of the
application that the Advocate informed about
unserved notice of the Respondent No.3,
however, the applicant had difficulty to get
the correct address of the Resp. No.3 within
stipulated time an consequently could not
comply the directions of this court. The
another agony in the matter of delay of 215
days in making the application seeking
restoration.

¶8

2)Consideringthecontroversy,
status of the appellant with her two minor
kids the delay is not intentional. There is
no deliberate omission. It is condoned.

¶9

¶10

The appeal is restored to original position
as against the Respondent No.3. Now the
counsel for Respondent No.3 waives service.

¶11

3)At the request of both the sides
call R & P. Appeal to be disposed of at
admission stage. S.O. 21st August, 2009.

¶12

4)Considering the peculiar facts and
circumstances, without adverting to the
merits at this stage, the earlier interim
protection granted in favour of the
appellant to continue till next date.

¶13

Date: 15/07/2009

¶14

K.U.CHANDIWAL,
(JUDGE)

¶15

cmg/ca189909

Ambika Dilip Kamble and Ors. v. Sunita Suryakantrao Kamble and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambika Dilip Kamble and Ors. v. Sunita Suryakantrao Kamble and 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

Umaji Vitoba Kalyankar and Others Vs Kausalyabai W/O Shamrao Deshmukh and Others

Anantrao Shamrao Holikar Vs Tukaram Gopalrao Suryawanshi

Ashok Sukhdeo Suryawanshi Thr Lrs Kamalbai and Ors. Vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Shantaram Mahane Patil and Ors. Vs Eknath Kaluram Mahajan

The State of Maha Vs Manga Narayan Kumbhar

Chandrashekhar Vasantrao Gade Vs Shaikh Aziz Mohammad Hasan and Ors.