Avinash Ramdas Nandedkar Vs M.S Shirish and Company Represented by Its Partner and Ors. — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Avinash Ramdas Nandedkar Vs M.S Shirish and Company Represented by Its Partner and Ors. — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Delay of 67 days condoned and Civil Application No. 6838 of 2024 allowed to the extent of condonation; Civil Application No. 4607 of 2024 allowed with documents to be brought on record with proper pagination in continuation; both intervention applications (Civil Application Nos. 5103 and 5101 of 2024) allowed with the applicants to be arrayed as respondents in Review Application No. 64 of 2024; matters listed for hearing on 26 July 2024 along with Review Application (Stamp) No. 18585 of 2024.

Issue for consideration

Whether the 67-day delay should be condoned in Civil Application No. 6838 of 2024. +2 more

Court's answer

The 67-day delay is neither inordinate nor deliberate; keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji and Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Reghunathpur Nafar Academy, the delay deserves to be condoned.

Ratio / Principle

Delay of 67 days is condoned and Civil Application No. 6838 of 2024 is allowed to the extent of condonation of delay.

Key takeaways

Civil Application No. 4607 of 2024 is allowed; the documents sought to be relied upon are to be brought on record with proper pagination in continuation.ratio¶46
Both intervention applications, being Civil Application Nos. 5103 of 2024 and 5101 of 2024, are allowed and the applicants are to be arrayed as Respondents in Review Application No. 64 of 2024.ratio¶48
The Review Application arising out of Civil Application No. 6838 of 2024 is to be registered and listed along with Review Application No. 64 of 2024, and the matters stand over to 26 July 2024 for hearing of Review Application No. 64 of 2024 and Review Application (Stamp) No. 18585 of 2024.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (Ravindra V. Ghuge and R. M. Joshi, JJ., Per Court), order dated 12 July 2024: (i) condoned a 67-day delay, observing that the delay was neither inordinate nor deliberate and relying on the Supreme Court decisions in Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji, AIR 1987 SC 1353 and Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Reghunathpur Nafar Academy, (2013) 12 SCC 649, thereby allowing Civil Application No. 6838 of 2024 (in RAST/18585/2024) to the extent of condonation; (ii) allowed Civil Application No. 4607 of 2024 (in RA/64/2024) and directed the documents to be brought on record with proper pagination in continuation; (iii) allowed both intervention applications, Civil Application Nos. 5103 of 2024 (Paresh Pralhad Surve) and 5101 of 2024 (Avinash Ramdas Nandedkar), directing the applicants to be arrayed as respondents in Review Application (Civil) No. 64 of 2024 filed in WP/3416/2024 by M.S Shirish and Company against the Chairman and Managing Director, H.P. Corporation and Others; and (iv) directed registration of the review application and listing of Review Application No. 64 of 2024 together with Review Application (Stamp) No. 18585 of 2024 on 26 July 2024.

2024:BHC-AUG:14528-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

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

AVINASH RAMDAS NANDEDKAR

VERSUS

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

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

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

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

WITH

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

M.S SHIRISH AND COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER VERSUS

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

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

WITH

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

M.S SHIRISH AND COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER VERSUS

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

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

WITH

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

1 of 4

902.ca6838.24.odt

PARESH PRALHAD SURVE VERSUS

M.S SHIRISH AND COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER

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

WITH

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

AVINASH RAMDAS NANDEDKAR VERSUS

M.S SHIRISH AND COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER

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

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

DATE : 12^th JULY, 2024

PER COURT :-

ORDER BELOW CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6838 OF 2024

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

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.

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.

ORDER BELOW CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4607 OF 2024

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

6. The non-Applicants opposed.

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

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

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.

3 of 4

902.ca6838.24.odt

Stand over to 26^th July, 2024 for a hearing on Review

Application No. 64 of 2024 and Review Application (Stamp) No. 18585 of 2024.

( R. M. JOSHI, J. )

( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )

ssp

4 of 4

902.ca6838.24.odt