Allowed

Yusuf M. Talwala v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC16 Aug 2017APPR/9/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed revision setting aside dismissal of condonation of delay order upon applicant depositing specified amounts, restoring application to Additional Sessions Court.

What did the court decide?

Revision allowed with costs; impugned order set aside; Miscellaneous application restored; deposit of Rs.50,000/- within one week and Rs.2 Lakhs within four weeks directed.

Yusuf M. Talwala Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2017)

4.CA8

Aarti Palkar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.09 OF 2017 IN

¶7

REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO.08 OF 2017

¶8

Yusuf M. Talwala ….Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents

¶9

Mr. Aniket Nikam i/b. Mr.C.S. Damre for the Applicant. Mr. P.H. Gaikwad, APP for the State. Mr. M.S. Kadu for respondent No.2.

¶10

CORAM: SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED: 16^th AUGUST, 2017

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

Rule. The respondents waive service, by consent rule is

¶13

made returnable forthwith and the revision is taken up for final disposal.

¶14

The applicant herein has challenged the order dated 02.02.2015 whereby the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, challenging the Judgment dated 03.09.2013 in Criminal Case No.7118005/SS/2012, was dismissed for default. The respondents have consented for setting aside the impugned order subject to the applicant depositing an amount of Rs.50,000/within a period of one week from the date of this order and an

4.CA8

Aarti Palkar

amount of Rs. 2 Lakhs within four weeks from the date of this order. The applicant has agreed to deposit the amount of Rs.50,000/- within one week and Rs.2,00,000/- within four weeks. Statement accepted.

¶19

Hence, in the light of above statements, the following order is passed.

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The revision application is allowed with cost of Rs.10,000/-.

¶22

The impugned order dated 02.02.2015 in Misc. Application

¶23

No.2776 of 2013 is set aside and the Miscellaneous application is restored to file.

¶24

The applicant is directed to deposit Rs.50,000/- before the Additional Sessions Court within one week and Rs.2,00,000/within four weeks from the date of this order.

¶25

The parties to appear before the Additional Sessions Judge on 28.08.2017, at 11.00 a.m.

¶26

In view of disposing of the revision application, Criminal Application No.09 of 2017 does not survive and accordingly stands disposed of.

¶27

(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Yusuf M. Talwala v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yusuf M. Talwala v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Gajraj Mehta Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Manda Harishchandra Gosavi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nilesh Ramchandra More Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yusuf M. Talwala Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ranjit Sham Chougule and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Ranjit Sham Chougule and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.