Court condoned delay in a review application on the merits, holding that a respondent's failure to act under consent terms placed a sufficient cause on record.
Condonation of delay in filing the review application is allowed; application listed for hearing.
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.
( 1 )
ca12710.10
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12710 OF 2010
IN WP/5690/2004 WITH RA/226/2011 IN WP/5690/2004
MAHA STATE CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHA & ORS
Mr.R.N.Dhorde, Senior counsel for the applicant
Mr.S.B.Yawalkar, AGP for the respondent/State
Mr.G.N.Chincholkar, Advocate for respondent No.4
Mr.K.B.Choudhary, Advocate for respondent No.5
CORAM : S.S.SHINDE &
S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.
DATED :12.03.2018
P.C. :-
1.Heard learned Senior counsel appearing for the
review applicant and learned counsel appearing for the
non-applicant/respondents. Learned Senior counsel invites
our attention to para Nos.6 and 7 of the application for
condonation of delay and submits that since the non-
applicant No.4 did not act as per and on the basis of the
consent terms, which were placed on record in writ
petition No.5690/2004 and on the basis of said terms
petition was disposed of. The petitioner has no option
but to file the application for review of the order
passed on the basis of consent terms of the parties for
revival of prayers in the writ petition. Learned counsel
( 2 ) ca12710.10
appearing for the respective respondents vehemently
opposed the prayer for condonation of delay. Learned
counsel for respondent No.4 invites our attention to the
reply filed to the application for condonation of delay.
2.We have heard the learned counsel appearing for
the parties. Keeping in view the averments made in the
application and in particular para Nos.6 and 7 thereof,
we are of the opinion that the sufficient cause has been
disclosed so as to condone the delay. It appears that,
pursuant to the compromise between the petitioner and
respondent No.4, as alleged in the review application
respondent No.4 refused to act in terms of compromise. In
that view of the matter in our opinion the review
application needs to be considered on merits. Hence, for
the reasons stated in the application for condonation of
delay, same is allowed and disposed of. List the Review
application on 21.03.2018.
[S.M.GAVHANE,J.]
[S.S.SHINDE,J.]
VishalK/ ca12710.10
2 issues framed by the court
Whether sufficient cause exists for condoning delay in filing the review application.
Whether the review application should be considered on merits given the respondent's refusal to act under compromise terms.
MAHA STATE CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED
STATE OF MAHA
S.S. SHINDE
S.M. GAVHANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court