In a partition suit appeal, the High Court of Bombay condoned a 965-day delay by the appellants subject to payment of Rs.50,000 cost each to respondents 3 to 13 within 10 days on a condition.
Notice of motion made absolute subject to deposit of Rs.50,000 cost each by appellants by 10/11/2009.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2454 OF 2008 IN APPEAL (L) NO.362 OF 2008 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.239 OF 2006 IN SUIT NO.206 OF 2004
Ketan Jayantilal Shah and Anr. .. Appellants
Vs.
Rohitkumar Amrutlal Shah and Ors. .. Respondents
Mr.Tushar Goradia for the appellants
Mr.Paritosh Jaiswal alongwith Mr.Ashutosh Gavnekar i/b M/s.Kanga and Co. for respondent nos.3 to 11, 13A and 13B
Ms.Leena Shah i/b M/s.Niranjan and Co. for respondent nos.14 and 15
CORAM : J. N. PATEL & Smt.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, JJ
DATE : 12TH OCTOBER, 2009
P.C. :
2
require to be condoned and the learned single Judge in the impugned order offered to the plaintiffs to pay cost so that delay can be condoned, unfortunately, even that was not acceptable to the learned Advocate who was then appearing for the plaintiffs.
( J. N. Patel, J)
(Smt.R.P.Sondurbaldota, J)
3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing the appeal, exceeding 965 days, should be condoned.
Whether cost to be paid by appellants should be condoned.
Ketan Jayantilal Shah and Anr.
Rohitkumar Amrutlal Shah and Ors.
J. N. Patel
Smt.R.P.Sondurbaldota
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
