Allowed

The Union of India through the Director General and Anr. v. A.B. Pillay and Ors.

Bombay HC19 Oct 2018CAW/2209/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of two civil applications filed by respondents seeking an extension of time to comply with an earlier judgment. The court granted an extension of time but declined any further extension.

What did the court decide?

Extension of time to comply with the judgment and order in W.P. No. 3827 of 1999 granted till 28th February 2019.

The Union of India through the Director… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

Shridhar Sutar 1 10-caw-2209.18+.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2209 OF 2018 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2208 OF 2018 IN

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 3827 OF 1999

¶5

The Union of India and another … Applicants In the matter between A. B. Pillay and others … Petitioners Versus

¶6

The Union of India and another … Respondents

¶7

Mrs. Anjali Helekar a/w Mr. N. R. Prajapati for the Applicants. Mr. Prashant Kamble i/b Mr. A. S. Rao for the Respondents.

¶8

CORAM : A. S. OKA AND M. S. SONAK, JJ. DATE : 19^th OCTOBER, 2018.

¶9

P. C.:

¶10

The Writ Petition No. 3827 of 1999 was disposed of by a judgment and order dated 21^st September, 2017. The present applications are for extension of time to comply with the order. The Civil Application No. 2208 of 2018 is filed on 23^rd April, 2018. The prayer was for grant of extension of time by a period of six months. In Civil Application No. 2209 of 2018, the prayer is for grant of extension for a period of one year. This application is

¶11

filed on 7^th September, 2018.

¶12

1 of 2

¶13

Shridhar Sutar 2 10-caw-2209.18+.doc

¶14

The applications are opposed by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners by pointing out that steps for making compliance were commenced in June-2018.

¶15

After having perused both the applications, we find hardly any explanation for grant of extension of time. It is only by way of indulgence, we propose to extend the time till 28^th February, 2019.

¶16

Accordingly, we dispose of both the applications by granting extension of time to the applicants to comply with the judgment and order in the writ petition. The time will be available only till 28^th February, 2019. No further extension will be granted.

¶17

Both the civil applications are disposed of.

¶18

( M. S. SONAK, J. ) ( A. S. OKA, J. )

¶19

Shridhar Digitally signed byShridhar Marutirao Marutirao Sutar Date: 2018.10.22 Sutar 16:02:10 +0530

¶20

2 of 2

The Union of India through the Director General and Anr. v. A.B. Pillay and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Union of India through the Director General and Anr. v. A.B. Pillay and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S United Flass Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs Employees State Insurance Corp. and Anr.

M/S All India Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation and Anr.

M/S All India Glass Works Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation Bombay and Anr.

The Union of India through the Director General and Anr. Vs A.B. Pillay and Ors.

Tatyabhau S/O Kanhu Hargude Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Borouge Pte Ltd. Vs Multi Flex Lami Print Ltd.