Dismissed

Vijaykumar Madanlal Parikh and Anr. v. Nasrin Wd/ Rehman Bagban and Ors.

Bombay HC10 Jul 2009WP/3956/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged an order condoning a 126-day delay in filing an appeal against a decree in a regular suit where they were landlords and respondents were tenants. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding no merit in interfering with the District Judge's discretion.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed; hearing of the Civil Appeal expedited.

Vijaykumar Madanlal Parikh and Anr. Vs Nasrin Wd/ Rehman… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.3956 OF 2009

¶4

Vijaykumar Madanlal Parikh & anr...Petitioners

¶5

 V/s.

¶6

Nasrin w/o. Rehman Bagban & ors

¶7

..Respondents

¶8

Mr.Sagar Kasar, Advocate, for the petitioners
None for the respondents

¶9

CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J.

¶10

DATE :10TH JULY, 2009

¶11

P.C.

¶12

.This Writ Petition takes exception to the

¶13

Order dated 21st August, 2008, passed by the learned

¶14

District Judge � 3, Malegaon, District Nasik, by

¶15

which Order the application for condonation of

¶16

delay filed by the respondents herein came to be

¶17

allowed and the delay in filing the Appeal against

¶18

the decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No.61 of

¶19

2005 came to be condoned. The respondents are the

¶20

tenants of the shop premises in question whereas

¶21

the petitioners are the landlords. The learned

¶22

¶23

District Judge � 3, Malegaon, District Nasik, for
the reasons mentioned in the application deemed it
fit to condone the delay of 126 days in filing the

¶24

Appeal. Having perused the reasons mentioned by
the respondents on the basis of which condonation
of delay was sought, in my view, no interference is
called for with the discretion exercised by the
learned District Judge � 3, Malegaon, District

¶25

Nasik in the matter of condonation of delay. There
is, therefore, no merit in the challenge raised to

¶26

the impugned Order dated 21stAugust, 2008.

¶27

However, the hearing of the said Civil Appeal is
expedited. With the aforesaid observations, the
above Writ Petition is dismissed.

Vijaykumar Madanlal Parikh and Anr. v. Nasrin Wd/ Rehman Bagban and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijaykumar Madanlal Parikh and Anr. v. Nasrin Wd/ Rehman Bagban 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

Yadav Hari Pagire Vs Raosaheb Rangrao Jadhav

Ganesh Shankar Bhosale Vs Dnyanu Krishna Bhosale (Decd) by Lrs Vithal Dnyanu Bhosale and Ors.

Ganesh Shankar Bhosale Vs Dnyanu Krishna Bhosale (Decd) by Lrs Vithal Dnyanu Bhosale and Ors.

Bharat Forge Limited Vs Pune Cantonment Board and Anr.

N. Geetanjali Parag Parelkar Vs Parag Subhash Parelkar

Shri. Krishnat Dnyanu Wapilkar and Ors. Vs the Range Forest Officer