Disposed

Chandrakant Vyankatrao Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Others Thr Its Secretary

Bombay HC17 Jan 2024CA/11353/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order condones the delay of 209 days in filing a review application by the applicant. The court accepted the applicant's grounds regarding harassment and lack of income as sufficient reasons for the delay despite opposition.

What did the court decide?

The application for condonation of delay is allowed and the office is directed to register the Review Application.

Chandrakant Vyankatrao Patil Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:1205-DB

¶2

901-(A)-CA-11353-2023.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11353 OF 2023 IN REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL)(ST) NO.24230 OF 2023 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1380 OF 2021

¶5

CHANDRAKANT VYANKATRAO PATIL

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶8

Mr. Chandrakant Vyankatrao Patil – Party-in-person Mr. P. S. Patil, AGP for Respondent - State Mr. V. S. Panpatte, Advocate for Respondent No.2

¶9

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

¶10

DATE : 17.01.2024

¶11

ORDER (Per: Y. G. Khobragade, J.) :-

¶12

Heard the party-in-person Mr. Chandrakant Patil, Mr. V. S. Panpatte, the learned Counsel appearing for non-applicant No.2 and Mr. P. S. Patil, the learned AGP for the State.

¶13

By the present application, the applicant prays for condonation of delay of 209 days caused in filing review application. In Para No. 6 of the application, the applicant has set out the ground for condonation of delay as under:-

¶14

1 of 2

¶15

(( 2 ))

¶16

901-(A)-CA-11353-2023

¶17

“6) The applicant further says and submits that, the respondents are habitual, faddiest, criminals. All previous appointments of Assistant Teachers are certainly illegal, false and bogus. The Hon’ble High Court passed order dated 05.01.2016 in W.P. 4864 of 2015 for still de-recognization and respondent nos. 8 and 9 passed still de-recognization on dt 27.12.2016, 01.12.2021 and 05.03.2022. Therefore delay caused 209 days for filing review application, because party in person without single rupees income and he has struggling since 2014 to till today in various matter against the respondents. Therefore, the delay caused in filing review application. The delay is not intentional but for the interest of justice and suffered harassed, extortioned by all respondents with common conspiracy. Therefore applicant has not filed review application within time and delay caused for filing review application.”

¶18

Though, the non-applicants resisted application and contended that the applicant failed to give sufficient reason for explaining the delay, however, considering the applicant’s grievance in respect of seeking review of the judgment and order dated 08.12.2022 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.1380 of 2021, the delay is hereby condoned on the ground set out in the application.

¶19

The office to register the Review Application.

¶20

[Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.]

¶21

[SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ]

¶22

SMS

¶23

2 of 2

Chandrakant Vyankatrao Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Others Thr Its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrakant Vyankatrao Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Others Thr Its Secretary

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

Manoj Suresh Udmale Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Chief Secretary and Others

Ramji S/O Kondji Khandare and Other Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nana Bhimrao Patil (Dukre) Vs the State of Maharashtra

Chandrakant Vyankatrao Patil vs the State of Maharashtra and Others Thr Its Secretary

Pritamsingh Sardarsingh Chhabada Died Thr Lrs Ajitkaur Pritam Singh Chhabada Vs Pratap Builders and Developers Thr. Partners Premchand Pratapmal Surana Died Thr Lrs Vijaya and Ors.

Pritamsingh Sardarsingh Chhabada Died Thr Lrs Ajitkaur Chhabada Vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector Aurangabad and Ors.