Allowed

Shri Kailash Bapu Abnave v. Smt. Shalinin Ramkrishna Jagtap

Bombay HC10 Aug 2012CAS/1283/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This brief order deals with a Civil Application seeking condonation of 104 days delay to recall an order dismissing a Second Appeal for non-removal of office objections. The court allowed the application, condoning the delay and recalling the previous order.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 104 days delay; recall, quashing, and setting aside of the order dated 21-01-2012 dismissing the Second Appeal.

Shri Kailash Bapu Abnave Vs Smt. Shalinin… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

1 11 cas 1283.12 in rc 888.12.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1283 OF 2012 IN REJECTED CASE NO. 888 OF 2012 IN

¶5

SECOND APPEAL (STAMP) NO.28605 OF 2011

¶6

Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders. Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

Mr. Mahendra Agvekar i/b Mr. Mandar Limaye for the Applicant.

¶8

CORAM : K.K.TATED, J. DATE : 10/08/2012

¶9

PC :

¶10

1 Heard the learned counsel for the Applicant.

¶11

2 This Application is for recalling the order dated 21^st January, 2012 passed by the learned Additional Registrar in Second Appeal (Stamp) no. 28605 of 2011 by which the Second Appeal was dismissed for nonremoval of office objections.

¶12

1/3

¶13

2 11 cas 1283.12 in rc 888.12.doc

¶14

3 The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant states that now they have removed all office objections. He further states that it remains on their part to remove office objections within time.

¶15

4 Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Applicant and the averments made in para 6 and 7 of the Civil Application, I am satisfied that the Applicant has made out case for condonation of 104 days delay in preferring the present Civil Application and for recalling the conditional order dated 21^st January, 2012 passed by the learned Additional Registrar. Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) which read thus:

¶16

“ a) that the delay of 104 days caused in filing the above civil application be condoned. b) that the order dated 21-01-2012

¶17

2/3

¶18

3 11 cas 1283.12 in rc 888.12.doc

¶19

passed by Additional Registrar in Second Appeal (Stamp) No.28605 of 2011 by which the Second Appeal was dismissed for non removal of office objections be recalled, quashed and set aside and Second Appeal (Stamp) No.28605 of 2011 be restore to file and decided on its own merits.”

¶20

5 Civil Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶21

(K.K.TATED, J.)

¶22

katkam

¶23

3/3

Shri Kailash Bapu Abnave v. Smt. Shalinin Ramkrishna Jagtap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Kailash Bapu Abnave v. Smt. Shalinin Ramkrishna Jagtap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ahok Krishna Waghmale and Ors. Vs Mandakini Appasaheb Jadhav

Shri Shankar Keshav Mali Vs Shri Ibrahim Humain Jamadar

Ahok Krishna Waghmale and Ors. Vs Mandakini Appasaheb Jadhav

Dadaso Maruti Mane Vs Shri Kashinath Amrut Bellenavar

Arjun Dewoo Rokade Vs Sadashiv Dhondu Rokade

Dadaso Maruti Mane Vs Shri Kashinath Amrut Bellenavar