A streamlined order by a full Bench of Civil Appellate Jurisdiction quashing a lower court's order rejecting a plea to condone delay in setting aside abatement.
Impugned order quashed, application allowed, amendment directed within four weeks, costs of Rs. 2000/- awarded.
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.
28.08.2015
WP-2200-14.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2200 OF 2014
Shri. Dattu Tukaram Chavan (Since deceased through his legal heirs) Shri. Kachru Bhika Chavan and others .. Petitioners Versus Shri. Pandurang Rajaram Chavan .. Respondent
Shri. Sachin Gite, for the Petitioners. Shri. Pratik B. Rahade, for the Respondent No.1.
CORAM : R.M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 28th AUGUST, 2015
P.C.
1. The above Writ Petition takes exception to the order dated 09.12.2013 passed by the Learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nashik, by which order the application filed by the Plaintiffs to condone the delay in filing the application and to set aside the abatement qua the Plaintiff No.1 came to be rejected. The delay was of three years and the reasons mentioned by the Applicant did not commend acceptance to the Trial Court. It is required to be noted that there is more than one Plaintiff who have filed the suit in question and the abatement is qua the Plaintiff No.1. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent herein i.e. original Defendant opposes the above Petition, but ultimately leaves it to
BGP .
1 of 2
WP-2200-14.doc 28.08.2015
this Court. In my view, having regard to the facts as aforestated where there is more than one Plaintiff, it would be just and proper to set aside the order dated 09.12.2013 and in turn allow the application Exh.34 filed by the Plaintiffs for setting aside the abatement qua the Plaintiff No.1. The impugned order is accordingly quashed and set aside and resultantly, the application Exh.34 stands allowed. Amendment to be carried out within four weeks from date and amended cause title to be served on the other side. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Plaintiffs to pay costs of Rs.2000/- to the Respondent within four weeks. With the directions as aforesaid, the above Writ Petition is disposed of.
[R.M. SAVANT, J]
2 of 2
BGP .
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order rejecting condonation of delay and setting aside abatement in a suit with multiple plaintiffs should be set aside.
Whether it is just and proper to allow the application for setting aside abatement qua Plaintiff No.1 despite the delay.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shri. Dattu Tukaram Chavan (Since deceased through his legal heirs) Shri. Kachru Bhika Chavan and others
Shri. Pandurang Rajaram Chavan
R.M. Savant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court