Partly allowed

Pranlal Mohanlal Vadhera v. Mak Estates and Properties Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai- 400058

Bombay HC16 Jun 2021IA/1261/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Mumbai, as part of civil appeals, dealt with two interim applications. The court noted an amicable settlement between the parties and granted condonation for a significant filing delay. Both applications were disposed of, with one resulting in the restoration of earlier cases and the other allowing intervention.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 543 days condoned; earlier case numbers restored in IA No. 1223. Applicant permitted to intervene in IA No. 1261; Second Appeal amended.

Pranlal Mohanlal Vadhera Vs Mak Estates and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

09-IA-1223-2019.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1223 OF 2019

¶4

IN

¶5

REJECTED CASE NO. 9 OF 2020

¶6

(SECOND APPEAL NO. (STAMP) NO. 11220 OF 2016)

¶7

M/s. MAK Estates and Properties Private Limited… Applicant

¶8

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

¶9

M/s. MAK Estates and Properties Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant
Versus
Shantilal Chimanlal Sheth and Ors.… Respondents

¶10

WITH

¶11

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1261 OF 2019

¶12

IN

¶13

REJECTED CASE NO. 9 OF 2020

¶14

(SECOND APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 11220 OF 2016

¶15

Pranlal Mohanlal Vadhera

¶16

… Applicant

¶17

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

¶18

MAK Estates and Properties Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant

¶19

Versus
Shantilal Chimanlal Sheth and Ors.… Respondents

¶20

Mr. Arun Panickar, for the Applicant.
Ms. Mery Rinta Raju, for Respondent No.1.
Mr. Mitesh Varshney a/w Abhiraj K., for Respondent No.2.

¶21

Ms. Aksha Hudda i/b Hudda and Associates, for Intervener.

¶22

CORAM : V. G. BISHT, J.

¶23

 DATE : 16th June, 2021.

¶24

Rekha Patil 1/2

¶25

09-IA-1223-2019.odt

¶26

IA 1223 OF 2019

¶27

PC:

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and respondents. Since
the matter has been settled amicably between the parties, there is no
objection to the present application. In view of this, the delay of 543
days in filing the Civil Application is condoned. Similarly, Civil
Application Nos. 882 and 883 of 2017 and Second Appeal (Stamp) No.
11220 of 2016 is restored to the file.

¶29

2 Interim Application is accordingly stands disposed of.

¶30

IA 1261 OF 2019

¶31

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and respondents. Since
the matter has been settled amicably between the parties, there is no
objection to the present application. In view of this, the applicant is
allowed to be intervened as party-respondent. Second Appeal be
amended forthwith accordingly.

¶32

2 Interim Application is accordingly stands disposed of.

¶33

Rekha Patil 2/2

Pranlal Mohanlal Vadhera v. Mak Estates and Properties Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai- 400058

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pranlal Mohanlal Vadhera v. Mak Estates and Properties Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai- 400058

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

Kamlesh Kashinath Dusane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sameer Chandrakant Jadhav Vs the State of Maharshtra

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited through Its Corporate Office Vs Smt.Aparna Ravindra Jadhav and Ors.

M/S. Mak Estates and Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shantilal Chimanlal Sheth and Ors.

M/S. Aashiyana Builders Firm(Lonavla), a Partnership Firm Thr. Partners Aslam I. Merchant and Ors. Vs Saroj Bhogilal Solanki and Ors.

Nilesh Ramesh Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.