Allowed

Vithal Krishna Bansode (Since Decd. Thro. His Heirs) Bhaskar Vithal Bansode. v. Smt. Tanubai Tukaram Bansode and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Mar 2012CAS/465/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an applicant's Civil Application seeking condonation of a 505-day delay in filing a Second Appeal. The delay was attributed to the applicant being unrepresented in the Lower Appellate Court and subsequent delays in procuring documents and preparing the appeal. The application was disposed of in the applicant's absence of the respondent.

What did the court decide?

The delay of 505 days in filing the Second Appeal is condoned. The applicant is directed to pay costs of Rs. 1,000 to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority within four weeks before the appeal

Vithal Krishna Bansode (Since Decd. Thro. His… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

cas-465.09.sxw

¶2

¶3

lgc

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.465 OF 2009 IN SECOND APPEAL STAMP NO.12224 OF 2008

¶6

Vithal Krishna Bansode since deceased through his heirs Bhaskar Vithal Bansode : Applicant.

¶7

Versus Smt.Tanubai Tukaram Bansode Her Constituted Attorney Shri Krishna Sakharam Bhosale and ors. : Respondents.

¶8

Mr.Rajesh B Parab for the Applicant. Mr.R L Majgaonkar for the Respondent No.1.

¶9

CORAM : R M SAVANT, J. DATE : 26^th March 2012

¶10

P.C.

¶11

1 The above Civil Application has been appearing on Board from time to time. By order dated 22/2/2012 it was made clear that in the event no appearance is put up on behalf of the Respondent No.1/original Plaintiff on the said day the matter would be proceeded with in the absence of the Respondent No.1. This was in view of the fact that the learned counsel Shri Majgaonkar who has filed his appearance on behalf of the Respondent No.1 had informed the Court that the Respondent No.1 has taken away the papers from him and he has no instructions to appear in the matter. On the said day, this Court directed the learned counsel Shri Majgaonkar to intimate the Respondent No.1 about the adjourned date i.e. 12^th March 2012. The learned counsel Shri Majgaonkar, has accordingly by letter dated 28^th February 2012 and thereafter

¶12

 2 cas-465.09.sxw

¶13

by letter dated 22^nd March 2012 informed the Respondent No.1 about the above Civil Application being kept for hearing. In spite of the said letters, the Respondent No.1 has not appeared nor has instructed the learned counsel Shri Majgaonkar. In that view of the matter, the above Civil Application would have to be proceeded with in the absence of the Respondent No.1.

¶14

2 The above Civil Application has been filed for condonation of delay of 505 days in filing the above Second appeal. The reasons therefor are mentioned in Paras 9 and 10. The sum and substance of the reasons is that since the learned advocate appearing for the Applicant/Appellant in the trial Court was appointed as a learned Judge the hearing of the Appeal before the Lower Appellate Court was exparte as the Applicant/Appellant went unrepresented. It is further the case of the Applicant/Appellant that in view of the fact that the Appeal was heard exparte, he was not aware of the decision rendered in the Appeal, and after he acquired knowledge of the same, some time was lost in obtaining the papers and the certified copies of the judgment and order passed by the Lower Appellate Court. It is further the case of the Applicant/Appellant that some time was also lost in preparing the papers for filing the above Second Appeal.

¶15

3 In my view, the reasons mentioned in the above Civil Application for seeking condonation of delay commend acceptance. The above Civil Application is accordingly allowed. Resultantly, the delay of 505 days in filing

¶16

 3 cas-465.09.sxw

¶17

the above Second Appeal stands condoned. The above Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. The Applicant/Appellant to pay costs of Rs.1,000/ to be deposited with the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority within a period of four weeks from date. After the costs are paid and the receipt to that effect is produced by the Applicant/Appellant, the office to number the above Second Appeal and place it for admission after the said period of four weeks comes to an end.

¶18

[R.M.SAVANT, J]

Vithal Krishna Bansode (Since Decd. Thro. His Heirs) Bhaskar Vithal Bansode. v. Smt. Tanubai Tukaram Bansode and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vithal Krishna Bansode (Since Decd. Thro. His Heirs) Bhaskar Vithal Bansode. v. Smt. Tanubai Tukaram Bansode and Ors.

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

Smt. Sumanbai W/o Kera Gadhave Vs 1 Vithal S/o Birla Changdev Gadhave @ Pandurang Kera Gadhawe

The State of Maharashtra Vs Sou. Nirmala Ramchandra Sawant and Anr.

Birudeo Haibatti Chougule and Anr. Vs Smt. Shantabai Ashok Hakke.

Dada Tukakram Patil Vs Kallapa Jakappa Dandage (Since Decd. Thro.. L. H. ) Tarabai Kallappa Dandage

Smt. Lata Bhausaheb Patil Vs Bhausaheb Nivrutti Patil

Bhikaji Govind Khamkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.