Allowed

The State of Maharashtra Thr. the Special Land Acquisition Officer v. Sou. Sitabai Kana Thakur

Bombay HC13 Mar 2018CRA/155/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed condonation of 37 days delay in filing a Civil Revision Application to set aside a conditional order regarding registration of a First Appeal. The delay was excused on account of non-receipt of a Demand Draft. Deferred payment of deficit court fees. Disposed the applications.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Application allowed; First Appeal restored to file subject to deposit of deficit Court fees within 8 weeks.

The State of Maharashtra Thr. the Special Land Acquisition… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

vks

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.475 OF 2017 IN

¶4

CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO.2739 OF 2017 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.32542 OF 2015 IN L.A.R. NO.110 OF 2008

¶5

State of Maharashtra

¶6

Through Collector and anr … Petitioners V/s. Sitabai Kana Thakur and ors … Respondents

¶7

Mr. A.R. Patil, AGP for the Petitioners State

¶8

CORAM : DR.SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.

¶9

DATE : 13^TH MARCH, 2018.

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

1] Not on board.

¶12

2] Upon mentioning, taken on today's board.

¶13

3] This application is for condonation of delay in filing Civil Revision Application. The delay is of 37 days.

¶14

4] The cause for filing above Civil Revision Application is the conditional order passed by this Court on 20.11.2015, in the

¶15

above said First Appeal granting two weeks time to pay deficit Court fees, failing which the registration was to stand

¶16

1/3

¶17

507 CAC 475 OF 2017.odt automatically refused.

¶18

4] On account of non compliance of the above order namely, the payment of deficit Court fees, the conditional order became operative and resultantly the registration of the First Appeal stood refused.

¶19

4] The order passed by learned Registrar (Judicial-I) is referable to Rule 4(vi) of the Chapter V of High Court (Appellate Side) Rules. Against such an order, there is a remedy of Revision provided by Rule 6 of the same Chapter. The said Rule provides that such order shall be revisable upon a regular Stamp Application, which shall be filed within 7 days from the date of the order.

¶20

5] It may be stated that First Appeal was filed by the applicant on the payment of nominal Court fees. However, as per statement made in the application for condonation of delay, acquiring body has not deposited the Demand Draft for the payment of deficit Court fees with the office of the Government Pleader, High Court, Mumbai, in time. Now the Demand Draft is received. Hence, as the delay in deposit of deficit Court fee was only on account of non receipt of the Demand Draft in time, it has to be held that sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay and for allowing Civil Revision Application, to set aside the conditional order passed by the Registrar (Judicial-I).

¶21

2/3

¶22

6] In identical fact situations earlier also this Court has

¶23

come to the conclusion that notice to otherside is not required in so far as condonation of delay in filing Civil Revision Application for setting aside the conditional order, passed by the learned Registrar (Judicial -I), of this Court. The learned AGP has also relied upon the order to that effect passed in Civil Application No.458 of 2015, in Civil Revision Application No.15443 of 2015 in First Appeal (ST) No.1514 of 2015 in L.A.R.No.188 of 2007, dated 30^th September, 2015.

¶24

7] In view thereof, the present application for condonatioin of delay is allowed and made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b) of the said Civil Application.

¶25

8] Civil Revision Application for restoration of the First Appeal is also allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) thereof. Resultantly the First Appeal is restored to file subject to deposit of deficit Court fees within the period of 8 weeks from today.

¶26

9] Both the Civil Application for condonation of delay and Civil Revision Application are accordingly disposed of.

¶27

[DR.SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.]

¶28

3/3

The State of Maharashtra Thr. the Special Land Acquisition Officer v. Sou. Sitabai Kana Thakur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra Thr. the Special Land Acquisition Officer v. Sou. Sitabai Kana Thakur

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

Smt. Lakhan B. Mandhyan and Ors. Vs Jagdish C Purshotamani and Ors.

Gordon Fernandes and Ors. Vs Bella Felix Fernandes and Anr.

M/S. Prabhavee Promoters and Developers Private Limited Vs Shri Vilas Laxman Ingawale and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra, Thru. the Collector and Anr. Vs Shri Chandrakant Lahu Thakur and Ors.

Bapu Krishna Patil and Ors. Vs Vikramsinh Vilas Khade

The State of Maharashtra Thr. the Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs Sou. Sitabai Kana Thakur