In this condonation of delay application, the High Court set aside the erroneous application of the Supreme Court number to a Family Court Appeal.
Application for condonation of delay allowed, conditioned on payment of Rs. 500 as costs to the Legal Services Authority.
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.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.......
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 25 OF 2009 IN
FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO (ST) 1885 OF 2009
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s Order
Court’s Or Judge’s Orders
Mr. Mohan Pillai i/b Madhavi M. Pillai for the Appellant
S.M. Mirajkar for the Respondent
CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & RAVI K. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 03.04.2009
P.C. :
Applicant and Mr. Mirajkar, the learned counsel for the Respondent
beyond the time by 154 days whereas as per Mr.
RMA
1
CAM188709030409.sxw
Mirajkar, the Appeal is beyond the time of 183 days.
(RAVI K. DESHPANDE, J) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J)
2
CAM188709030409.sxw
RMA
(Leena Vs Kuttikattu)
3
CAM188709030409.sxw
RMA
RMA 4 CAM188709030409.sxw
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a Supreme Court number is applicable to a Family Court Appeal for condonation of delay.
Leena
Kuttikattu
B.H. MARLAPALLE
RAVI K. DESHPANDE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
