This court allowed five civil applications seeking condonation of delay. The judge observed that non-applicants did not file counter-affidavits and other appeals from the same award had already been admitted, leading to the discharge of the applications.
Civil Applications are allowed. Delay is condoned.
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.
ca2194-12.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2194/2012 IN F.A.ST.NO.5537/12 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2229/12 IN F.A.ST.NO.5519/12 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2227/12 IN F.A.ST.NO.5533/12 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2204/12 IN F.A.ST.NO.5550/12
Mr.S.S.Dande, Adv.for applicants in all the applications. Mr.N.V.Gaware,Adv.for respondent no.2 [in C.A.No.2194/12].
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. DATE : 17th DECEMBER 2012.
ORAL ORDER :
. Heard learned counsel for respective parties. Shri Gavare, the learned counsel for non-applicant opposes the application on the ground that no sufficient cause is stated.
2] It appears that the non applicants have not filed application controverting the averments made in the application. It is also contended that the other appeals arising out of the same Award have been admitted by t his Court.
3] In light of above facts, Civil Applications are allowed. Delay is condoned.
[S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.]
umg/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether sufficient cause should be condoned for delay in filing civil applications.
Whether the applications should be allowed given that other appeals arising from the same award have been admitted.
Applicants
Respondent no.2
Non-applicants
S.V.GANGAPURWALA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
