Partly allowed

M.S Shirish and Company Represented by Its Partner v. Chairman and Managing Director, H.P. Corporation and Ors.

Bombay HC12 Jul 2024CA/4607/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench order condoning 67 days delay, allowing documents on record, and permitting intervenors in related review applications pending a future hearing.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 67 days delay allowed; documents brought on record; intervention applications allowed; matter listed for future hearing.

What the court decided

M.S Shirish and Company Represented by Its… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:14526-DB

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6838 OF 2024 IN RAST/18585/2024

¶4

AVINASH RAMDAS NANDEDKAR

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

M/S SHIRISH AND COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHIRISH DALICHAND OSWAL AND OTHERS

¶7

Mr. A. D. Shinde, Advocate for the for Applicant

¶8

Mr. R. S. Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. R. M. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.1

¶9

Mr. P. N. Kutti, Advocate for Applicant/Intervenor

¶10

WITH

¶11

REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL) NO. 64 OF 2024 IN WP/3416/2024

¶12

M.S SHIRISH AND COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER VERSUS

¶13

CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, H.P. CORPORATION AND ORS

¶14

Mr. R. S. Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. R. M. Deshmukh, Advocate for the applicant

¶15

WITH

¶16

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4607 OF 2024 IN RA/64/2024

¶17

M.S SHIRISH AND COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER VERSUS

¶18

CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, H.P. CORPORATION AND ORS

¶19

Mr. R. S. Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. R. M. Deshmukh, Advocate for the applicant

¶20

WITH

¶21

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5103 OF 2024 IN RA/64/2024

¶22

1 of 4

¶23

902.ca6838.24.odt

¶24

PARESH PRALHAD SURVE VERSUS

¶25

M.S SHIRISH AND COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER

¶26

Mr. P. N. Kutti, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. R. S. Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. R. M. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.1

¶27

WITH

¶28

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5101 OF 2024 IN RA/64/2024

¶29

AVINASH RAMDAS NANDEDKAR VERSUS

¶30

M.S SHIRISH AND COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER

¶31

Mr. A. D. Shinde, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. R. S. Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. R. M. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.1

¶32

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND R. M. JOSHI, JJ.

¶33

DATE : 12^th JULY, 2024

¶34

PER COURT :-

¶35

ORDER BELOW CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6838 OF 2024

¶36

Heard the learned Advocates for the respective sides. The respondent opposed the condonation of 67 days delay.

¶37

Considering that the delay is neither inordinate nor deliberate and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs. Mst. Katiji, AIR 1987 SC 1353 and Esha Bhattacharjee Vs. Managing Committee of Reghunathpur Nafar Academy, (2013) 12 SCC 649 , the delay of 67 days deserves to be

2 of 4

902.ca6838.24.odt

condoned.

3. The Civil Application to the extent of condonation of delay is allowed. Delay is condoned.

¶42

Since both the sides have filed Review Applications, the present Review Application be registered and be listed along with Review Application No. 64 of 2024 on 26^th July, 2024.

¶43

ORDER BELOW CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4607 OF 2024

¶44

We have heard learned Advocates for the respective sides. The Applicant desires to place documents on record.

¶45

6. The non-Applicants opposed.

¶46

Considering the reasons assigned, the Civil Application is allowed . The documents be brought on record with proper pagination in continuation.

¶47

ORDER BELOW CIVIL APPLICATION NOS. 5103 of 2024 AND 5101 OF 2024

¶48

The rival parties have filed these applications for seeking intervention in Review Application No. 64 of 2024. In view of the same, both these intervention applications are allowed . The Applicants be arrayed as Respondents in Review Application No. 64 of 2024.

¶49

3 of 4

¶50

902.ca6838.24.odt

¶51