Allowed
Smt. Sushma Mangesh Awale v. Shri. Mangesh Shankar Awale
Bombay HCCAM/176/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
13 cam 176-16.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 176 OF 2016 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO.187 OF 2015 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL (ST) NO. 13381 OF 2015
Sushma Mangesh Awale ..Applicant
v/s.
Mangesh Shankar Awale ..Respondent
Mr. Jayesh More i/b. Prashant Malik for the Applicant. Mr. Mahesh Joshi for the respondent.
CORAM : A.S.OKA & ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. DATED : 17TH NOVEMBER, 2016
P.C.
learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent opposes the application for restoration.
The application for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal
filed by the applicant was dismissed for non compliance as the
1 of 2
pps
13 cam 176-16.doc
applicant failed to furnish a copy of the application for condonation of delay for effecting service. Now, the respondent is represented by an advocate. Hence, a case for restoration is made out. Accordingly, the application is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and
(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) (A.S.OKA, J.)
2 of 2
pps
Sushma Mangesh Awale
Mangesh Shankar Awale
A.S. OKA
Anuja Prabhudesai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court