Allowed

M/S Shaila Clubs and Resorts Private Limited v. M/S. Savannah Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Jun 2023IA/4310/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed an interim application seeking condonation of delay for filing a review petition. The court held that the assigned reasons were justifiable and the delay was not inordinate, permitting condonation to advance substantive justice. The review petition was listed for futures consideration.

What did the court decide?

The application for condonation of delay stands allowed; the Review Petition is listed before the Court on 14th July, 2023.

M/S Shaila Clubs and Resorts Private Limited Vs M/S… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

18-ia-4310-2023.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4310 OF 2023 IN

¶4

REVIEW PETITION NO.38 OF 2023

¶5

M/s. Shaila Clubs and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. ...Petitioner

¶6

vs.

¶7

M/s. Savannah Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

Mr. Rahul Sarda a/w. Ms. Punthi Shah i/b. Aarna Law LLP for the Petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Jamsheed Master a/w. Ms. Shruti Maniar and Ms. Sannaya Ghandhi i/b. M/s. Solomon & Co., for Respondent No. 1. Mr. S.S. Patwardhan, for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

¶11

CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : JUNE 22, 2023

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

This application is preferred seeking condonation of delay of

¶15

70 days in preferring Review Petition against an order dated 21^st

¶16

October, 2022 passed in Writ Petition No. 11610 of 2022.

¶17

The respondent No. 1 has resisted the application by filing an affidavit in reply.

¶18

I have perused the averments in the application.

¶19

Mr. Master, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 submitted

¶20

that the grounds taken in the application for condonation of delay

¶21

do not deserve countenance as no sufficient cause can be said to have been thereby made out.

Vishal Parekar

...1

18-ia-4310-2023.doc

The learned counsel for the petitioner/applicant, on the other

¶26

hand, submitted that, in fact, the delay is only of 31 days. On the date the order sought to be reviewed was passed the moratorium was in operation in view of the admission order passed by the NCLT and the period of limitation would commence from 2^nd December, 2022.

¶27

By any stand and, the delay is not inordinate. It is trite, an application for condonation of delay is required to be construed liberally so as to advance the cause of substantive justice. In the application the applicant has assigned justifiable reasons. I am, therefore, persuaded to allow the application.

¶28

Hence, the following order.

¶29

ORDER

¶30

The application stands allowed.

¶31

The delay in preferring the Review Petition stands condoned.

¶32

The Review Petition be listed before the Court on 14^th July, 2023.

¶33

Vishal Parekar

¶34

...2

M/S Shaila Clubs and Resorts Private Limited v. M/S. Savannah Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Shaila Clubs and Resorts Private Limited v. M/S. Savannah Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd. 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

Samsher Bahadur Singh and Ors. Vs M/S. Wasp Pumps (Pvt) Ltd., and Anr.

Mr. Mallinath Kadappa Hanji Vs Mrs. Jyosthna Mallinath Hanji

Sanjay Baburao Sonawale Vs the Commissioner, State Co-Operative Election Authority and Ors.

Shayona Developers a Partnership Firm and Ors. Vs Babubhai Chhanabhai Patel and Ors.

Shayona Developers a Partnership Firm and Ors. Vs Babubhai Chhanabhai Patel and Ors.

Mr. Gajanan Anant Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.