Disposed

Subhash Babasaheb Kavhale v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Jul 2017CA/1236/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Civil Chamber allowed multiple condonation of delay applications. The Court cited Supreme Court observations to grant condonation, strictly conditioning that applicants forfeit interest and statutory benefits accruing during the delayed period.

What did the court decide?

Civ. Apps. for condonation of delay disposed of; First appeals notice issued, notice waived by respondents.

Subhash Babasaheb Kavhale Vs the State of Mah… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

CA 2926.2016+connected.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2926 OF 2013 IN

¶5

FAST/1409/2013

¶6

RANGNATH DAJIBA ARDAD VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

¶8

WITH

¶9

CA/1235/2013 IN FAST/2460/2013

¶10

WITH

¶11

CA/1236/2013 IN FAST/1404/2013

¶12

WITH

¶13

CA/5306/2016 IN FAST/31062/2015

¶14

WITH CA/5309/2016 IN FAST/31064/2015

¶15

WITH

¶16

CA/8387/2016 IN FAST/31070/2015

WITH

FA/2651/2017

WITH FA/2653/2017

WITH

CA/5791/2017 IN FAST/13756/2015

¶22

WITH

¶23

CA/5792/2017 IN FAST/13754/2015

¶24

WITH CA/5795/2017 IN FAST/13752/2015 WITH CA/9403/2017 IN FAST/31074/2015 WITH CA/9404/2017 IN FAST/31072/2015

¶25

Advocate for Applicant : Mr Kale Ajeet B. Mr B V Virdhe AGP for Respondent State

¶26

Advocate for Respondent-Acquiring body : Mr P G Rodge, Mr V C Solshe, S P Sonpavale, Mr R B Deshpande.

¶27

aaa/-

¶28

2 CA 2926.2016+connected.odt

¶29

CORAM : V.K. JADHAV, J. Dated: July 26, 2017

¶30

PER COURT :-

¶31

Heard.

¶32

Issue notice to the Respondents. Learned A.G.P.

¶33

waives notice for Respondent-State authorities. Mr. Rodge, learned counsel, on instructions, waives notice for respondent/acquiring body in Civil application nos. CA/5791/2017 in FAST/13756/2015, CA/5792/2017 in FAST/13754/2015 and CA/5795/2017 in

¶34

FAST/13752/2015.

¶35

On perusal of contents of application/s, it appears that the applicant/s is/are prevented from certain cause/s such as, financial constraints, drought situation etc. to prefer appeal/s within limitation. However, the inaction and/or negligence on the part of the applicant/s, to some extent, is responsible for causing such inordinate delay.

¶36

Learned A.G.P. for the respondent-State/authority

¶37

aaa/-

¶38

3 CA 2926.2016+connected.odt

¶39

and the learned counsel for the acquiring body strongly resisted the application/s on the ground that the delay has not been explained satisfactorily. In the alternate, learned counsel submit that delay may be condoned on the condition that if the applicant/s succeed/s in the appeal/s, the applicant/s shall not be entitled for the amount of interest and/or other statutory benefits of the period for which delay sought to be condoned.

¶40

In view of above and in the light of observations made by the Supreme Court in para 14 of the judgment, in the case of Ramanlal Deochand Shah vs. State of Maharashtra and another, reported in AIR 2013 SC 3452 , civil application/s for condonation of delay are allowed. Delay in filing the appeal/s is hereby condoned on the condition that the applicant/s shall not be entitled for the amount of interest and/or other statutory benefits of the period for which delay sought to be condoned.

¶41

Civil application/s for condonation of delay is/are

¶42

aaa/-

¶43

CA 2926.2016+connected.odt

¶44

¶45

accordingly disposed of.

¶46

In first appeal/s, issue notice to the respondents, returnable. Learned A.G.P. for respondent State/authority and learned counsel for acquiring body waive notice for respective respondents.

¶47

aaa/-

Subhash Babasaheb Kavhale v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Babasaheb Kavhale v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Randhabai Bhagwan Wadekar and Others

Anita Sumant Shinde and Ors. Vs the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Aurangabad

Executive Engineer Med Project Divn Osmanabad Vs Manik Ganpat Patil and Ors.

Subhash Babasaheb Kavhale Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Rangnath Dajiba Ardad Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Rangnath Dajiba Ardad Vs the State of Mah and Ors.