Partly allowed

Janu Bhika Bangar v. Narayan Bhiwa Vyapari and Anr.

Bombay HC28 Feb 2018REVN/586/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal revision application set aside an order dismissing a delay condonation application due to the applicant's lawyer's default, restoring the appeal to the Sessions Judge's file subject to payment of costs to the Legal Services Committee.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the order dismissing the condonation application; restore the appeal to the Sessions Judge's file; direct payment of Rs. 1,500 costs to the Legal Services Committee as a condition precedent.

Janu Bhika Bangar Vs Narayan Bhiwa Vyapari and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

1 905) revn586-16.doc

¶2

SAS

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.586 OF 2016

¶6

Janu Bhika Bangar ..Applicant. V/s. Narayan Bhiwa Vyapari & Anr. ..Respondents.

¶7

Ms.Payoshi Roy i/b. Dr.Yug Mohite Chaudhary for the applicant. Mrs.N.S.Jain,APP for the respondent-State.

¶8

CORAM: NITIN W.SAMBRE, J.

¶9

DATE : FEBRUARY 28, 2018

¶10

P.C.:-

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

By an order dated May 7, 2008, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kalyan convicted the applicant for an offence punishable under section 323 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Against the said conviction, a Miscellaneous Application No.49/2008 was filed seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal, which came to be dismissed on January 27,

¶13

2 905) revn586-16.doc

¶14

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the cause of dismissal is, failure on the part of the advocate for applicant to take appropriate steps in the matter. She sought to draw support from the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Rafiq and another V/s. Munshilal and another¹ so as to substantiate her contention that for default on the part of the lawyer, a litigant need not suffer.

¶15

The learned APP opposed the claim of the claim and submits that the applicant was not diligent enough, hence Appellate Court was right in dismissing the appeal. He submits that if indulgence is to be shown, the applicant be put to severe terms.

¶16

Having heard the submissions made, in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate, in my opinion, to set aside the order dated January 27, 2010 dismissing the application of the applicant for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, subject to payment of costs of Rs.1,500/- to be paid to the Legal Services Committee, District Court, Thane within a period of four weeks from today. If the cost is paid before the stipulated period, the

¶17

1 A.I.R 1981 Supreme Court 1400

¶18

3 905) revn586-16.doc

¶19

order dated January 27, 2010 is quashed and set aside and the appeal preferred by the present applicant against his conviction vide judgment and order dated May 7, 2008 shall stand restored to the file of the learned Sessions Judge.

¶20

The applicant shall produce receipt of payment of costs with the Legal Services Committee, District Court, Thane before the learned Sessions Judge, before whom the appeal is pending. The payment of cost is condition precedent.

¶21

If the costs as ordered is not paid, the order of dismissal of the appeal shall hold the field.

¶22

( NITIN W.SAMBRE, J. )

Janu Bhika Bangar v. Narayan Bhiwa Vyapari and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janu Bhika Bangar v. Narayan Bhiwa Vyapari and Anr.

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

Abhijeet Kisan Nalawde Vs the State of Maharashtra

Samran Arkate Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mrs.Rajkumari Ramjibhai Vishwakarma Vs Mrs. Taradevi Dharmendra Vishwakarma

Sukhinder Jaswant Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sayyedalli Mohammedali Siddqui Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sadanand Shivanna Shetty Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.