The high court allowed a civil application for condonation of delay of 52 days, finding the applicants satisfactorily explained the delay. The application was disposed of with costs not to be awarded.
The civil application was allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs.
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.
Tapadia RR
1/2 CAS/ /2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 84 OF 2011 IN REVIEW PETITION (ST) NO.26966 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.640 OF 2008
| Office Notes, Office Memoranda of |
Court's or Jud | ge's orders. |
|---|---|---|
| Coram, | ||
| appearances, |
||
| Court's orders or | ||
| directions and | ||
| Registrar's orders | ||
| Mr. Dilip | Bodke, Advocate for the | |
applicants. |
||
| Mr.V.S.Talkut | e, Advocate for the |
|
Respondents |
. |
|
| CORAM: R. DATE : 21 PC: |
G.KETKAR, J. /06/2013 |
|
| 1. Heard |
Mr.Dilip Bodke, learned | |
| counsel for | the applicants and Mr | |
| V.S.Talkute, | learned counsel for the | |
| respondents. | . | |
| 2. This |
is an application for | |
condonation |
of delay of 52 days in filing |
|
| the applicati | on. After hearing the learned | |
| counsel for | the applicants and the | |
learned coun |
sel for the respondents, I am |
|
| satisfied th | at the applicants have | |
| satisfactorily | explained the delay. Hence, |
2/2 CAS/ /2012
the Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs. The civil application is disposed of.
(R.G.KETKAR, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay is warranted given satisfactory explanation provided by applicants for a 52-day delay in filing the application.
Tapadia RR
Respondents
G. Ketkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
