The Court declined to entertain the writ petition on the ground that an appeal was available. It allowed the filing of an appeal with consideration of the writ petition's pendency.
Petition disposed of with liberty to institute appeal.
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
(15) WP 195 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
WP/195/2019
DILIP V. KOTHARI., …... PETITIONER
VS
MABEREST HOTELS PVT.
LTD., …... RESPONDENT
Mr. Venkatesh Nayak Salatry, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. J. E. Coelho Pereira, Senior Advocate with Mr. Somnath B. Karpe, Advocate
for the Respondent.
CORAM: M. S. SONAK, J.
DATE : 6th July, 2021.
P. C.:
Heard Mr. Salatry, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J. E.
Coelho Pereira, the learned Senior Advocate, who appears along with Mr. S.
Karpe, for the respondent.
2.Mr. Pereira, the learned Senior Advocate for the respondent points out
that there is an appeal provided against impugned order, and, therefore, this
petition may not be entertained.
3.In this case, the petitioner took out an application under Order 9 Rule 9
of C.P.C seeking restoration of the suit along with an application seeking
condonation of delay. By the impugned order, the learned trial Judge has
dismissed the application seeking condonation of delay. This dismissal, in effect
amounts to dismissal of the petitioner's application under Order 9 Rule 9 of
C.P.C seeking the restoration of the suit. As against this order, an appeal is
2
(15) WP 195 2019
maintainable. Therefore, there is no necessity to entertain the present petition.
4.Since this petition is not entertained only on the ground that the
petitioner has an alternate and efficacious remedy available, obviously, the
petitioner will have the liberty to institute such an appeal. Further, if such appeal
is indeed instituted by the petitioner, the appeal Court, will take into
consideration the circumstance that this petition was filed on 10/1/2019 and
remained pending in this Court till date.
5.This petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty as aforesaid. But, it is
made clear that this Court has not adverted to the merits of the matter, and,
therefore, all contentions of all the parties are left open.
M. S. SONAK, J.
MARIA Digitally signed by MARIA AURA Ap/- AURA PEREIRA PEREIRA Date: 2021.07.07 10:35:11 +05'30'
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus is maintainable when an appeal is available against the dismissal of an application for condonation of delay.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
DILIP V. KOTHARI
MABEREST HOTELS PVT. LTD.
M. S. SONAK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court