This court dismissed a second appeal challenging the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal's order condoning a 59-day delay in filing an appeal. The single judge held no substantial question of law arose and permitted no illegality or perversity in the Tribunal's reasoning.
The second appeal was dismissed.
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.
Digitally signed VARSHA by VARSHAVIJAY VIJAY RAJGURUDate: RAJGURU 2024.12.02 12:31:21 +0530
11-sa-717-2024-ia-14606-2024.doc
varsha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 717 OF 2024
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 14606 OF 2024
IN
SECOND APPEAL NO. 717 OF 2024
CCI Projects Private Limited … Appellant/Applicant vs. Bharat Baban Khadtare … Respondent
Mr. Vikramjit Garewal a/w. Mr. Abir Patel through VC a/w. Mr. Kartik Joshi h/f Wadia Gandhy & Co., for Appellant/Applicant
Ms. Shivani Shukla i/b. Mr.Anil D’souza for Respondent nos. 1 and 2.
CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 22nd NOVEMBER 2024
ORDER:
Page no. 1 of 3
11-sa-717-2024-ia-14606-2024.doc
The appellate tribunal has condoned the delay subject to payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/-.
Page no. 2 of 3
11-sa-717-2024-ia-14606-2024.doc
condonation of delay are specifically dealt in the impugned order. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 is right in relying upon the conclusions recorded in paragraph no.13 of the impugned order. The appellate tribunal has considered the grounds raised for condonation of delay and the respondent’s contentions that they are residing in UAE for which they required certain time to take steps. Only becuase, the rival contentions on merits between the parties are examined by the appellate tribunal, the reasons for the delay considered and accepted by the tribunal cannot be faulted. A perusal of the reasons recorded by the appellate tribunal indicates that all the rival contentions on delay have been considered in detail. I do not find any illegality or perversity in the reasons recorded in the impugned order.
(GAURI GODSE, J.)
Page no. 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal's order condoning a 59-day delay in filing an appeal.
Whether the Tribunal erred in examining the merits of the underlying dispute while deciding on the condonation of delay.
CCI Projects Private Limited
Bharat Baban Khadtare
Gauri Godse
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
