Single judge bench allowed a writ petition challenging an order condoning a 23-day delay in filing Vakalatnama. Held delay not inordinate; no interference under Article 226 required; petition disposed of.
No interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India; petition disposed of.
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.
53-wp-7197-2023.doc
Digitally signed by NIKITAKAILAS DARADE Date: 2023.09.15 10:21:09 +0530
Nikita
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.7197 OF 2023
NIKITA KAILAS DARADE
Leatherrelation India Pvt. Ltd. Thr. Its Director … Petitioner
V/s.
Pankaj M. Sheth and Ors. … Respondents
Mr. Zaman Ali for the Petitioner.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J.
DATED : SEPTEMBER 14, 2023
P.C.:
1
53-wp-7197-2023.doc
case of granting leave to defend. Therefore, petitioner’s rights are not jeopardise by condonation of delay in filing Vakalatnama.
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court was justified in condoning the delay of 23 days in filing the Vakalatnama in a commercial summary suit.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nikita Kailas Darade
Leatherrelation India Pvt. Ltd. Thr. Its Director
Pankaj M. Sheth and Ors.
AMIT BORKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
