Allowed

Vaijnath Ramrao Phad v. Dadasaheb Maroti Deokar

Bombay HC24 Mar 2014APPLN/5070/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Aurangabad held that the delay of 148 days by the applicant in filing an application for leave to appeal under the CrPC was condoned and allowed. In a separate sidebar case, the court issued notice to the respondent and adjourned proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 148 days condoned; application for leave to file appeal allowed. Notice issued and application adjourned to 15th April 2014.

Vaijnath Ramrao Phad Vs Dadasaheb Maroti Deokar — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

 16-crappln5070.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5070 OF 2012

¶3

Vaijanath s/o. Ramrao Phad

¶4

..Applicant

¶5

Vs

¶6

Dadasaheb s/o. Maroti Deokar..Respondent

¶7

Mr.A.N.Nagargoje, advocate for applicant

¶8

Mr.A.S.Gandhi, advocate for respondent - sole

¶9

CORAM : P.N.DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : MARCH 24, 2014

¶10

PER COURT :

¶11

Heard both side advocates.

¶12

2] It appears that the proceedings filed by the applicant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by way of complaint, was decided ex-parte on 28^th March, 2012. According to the applicant, ex-parte order came to the notice of the applicant on 19^th October, 2012 as, on 28^th March, 2012, neither the applicant nor his counsel was present. It appears that on obtaining certified copy of the impugned order in the last week of October, 2013, application is filed for leave to file appeal along with present application for condonation of delay of 148 days.

¶13

 16-crappln5070.odt

¶14

3]For the grounds mentioned in the application,
delay of 148 days caused to prefer the application
for leave to file appeal, is condoned.
Application allowed.

¶15

[P.N. DESHMUKH, J.]

¶16

kbp

¶17

 16-crappln5070.odt

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5069 OF 2012

¶19

Vaijanath s/o. Ramrao Phad

¶20

..Applicant

¶21

Vs

¶22

Dadasaheb s/o. Maroti Deokar..Respondent

¶23

Mr.A.N.Nagargoje, advocate for applicant

¶24

Mr.A.S.Gandhi, advocate for respondent - sole

¶25

CORAM : P.N.DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : MARCH 24, 2014

¶26

PER COURT :

¶27

Issuenoticetotherespondent.

¶28

Mr.A.S.Gandhi, learned counsel accepts notice for
the respondent. On his application, stand over to
15th April, 2014.

¶29

[P.N. DESHMUKH, J.]

¶30

kbp

Vaijnath Ramrao Phad v. Dadasaheb Maroti Deokar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vaijnath Ramrao Phad v. Dadasaheb Maroti Deokar

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

The State of Mah Vs Dagadu Sampatrao Deshmukh and Anr.

Satish Goraknath Sanap Vs the State of Maharashtra

Latabai Dinkar Sonawane Vs the State of Mah

Cosmo Films Ltd. Vs Pradeep Diwakar Pathak and Another

Satish Narayan Gadikar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shama Bhagwan Waghode and Antoher Vs the State of Maharashtra