A review petition allowed where the Division Bench recalled an impugned order dismissing a writ petition on account of delay due to the petitioner's counsel being absent on the hearing date originally scheduled.
Impugned order dated 3rd March 2010 recalled; writ petition restored to file.
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.
RPW. 21-10
VPH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
REVIEW PETITION No. 21 OF 2010 IN
WRIT PETITION No. 426 OF 2010
R. Sreekumar
... Petitioner
Vs. National Aviation Co. of India Ltd. & Anr. ... Respondents
Mr. S. N. Pillai, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Sudeep Dasgupta, for Respondents.
CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & B. P. COLABAWALLA, JJ.
DATE : AUGUST 11, 2015 PC.
. The Review Petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 3rd
March, 2010, whereby this Court was pleased to dismiss the writ
petition on the ground of delay of three years caused in filing the petition. It is submitted that the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner could not remain present on that day for the reasons mentioned in paragraph 6 of the review petition. Review petitioner has also stated in paragraph 4 the reasons why Petitioner has not filed the petition in time, viz. he has applied for further information under
RTI Act and also made a representation. In our view, it appears that
1 / 2
RPW. 21-10
since the Petitioner could not remain present on this day, this fact was
not brought to the notice of the Division Bench, the order dated 3rd March, 2010 is recalled and writ petition is restored to the file. Review petition is allowed and accordingly disposed.
Sd/Sd/[B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.]
Vinayak Halemath
2 / 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order dated 3rd March, 2010 dismissing the writ petition on delay is recallable due to absence of counsel.
R. Sreekumar
National Aviation Co. of India Ltd.
V. M. Kanade
B. P. Colabawalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
