Disposed

Sadbhav Infrastructure Project Ltd. v. Swarna Buildcon Pvt.Ltd.

Bombay HC8 Mar 2024WP/10833/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged rejection of its application for time to file a written statement in a commercial suit before the Pune District Court and alternatively sought direction to decide its condonation of delay application. The respondent raised no objection; the writ petition was allowed in terms of prayer (B) with contentions kept open and interim stay continuing until the application is heard.

What did the court decide?

District Court directed to hear and decide the 20 April 2022 condonation of delay application; stay of suit to continue till it is heard; no order as to costs.

Sadbhav Infrastructure Project Ltd. Vs Swarna… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed ANANT by ANANTKRISHNA NAIK KRISHNA Date: NAIK 2024.03.0816:34:38 +0530

¶2

1/2

¶3

23.WP.10833.2023 .doc

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.10833 OF 2023

¶6

Sadbhav Infrastructure Project Ltd. ... Petitioner
V/s.
Swarna Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. ... Respondent

¶7

Mr. Pankaj Savant a/w Ms. Neha Bhosale, Adv. A Divadkar i/b NDB Law for
the Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Sachin Hande for the Respondent.

¶9

CORAM : M. M. SATHAYE, J.

¶10

DATED : 8 MARCH 2024

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1.Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Counsel for the

¶13

sole Respondent.

¶14

2. The Petition is filed seeking the following prayers:

¶15

"(a)That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of
Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of any other appropriate
writ, order or directions quashing and setting aside the
order dated 8th February 2022 passed by the learned
District Court, Pune below application Exhibit 24 in
Commercial Suit No. 23 of 2021 and the written
statement in Commercial Suit No. 23 of 2021 already
filed by taken on record.

¶16

(B)In the alternative to prayer clause (A), this Hon'ble
Court may be pleased to direct the learned District Court
to hear and decide the application dated 20th April, 2022
for condoning the delay in permitting the Petitioner's
written statement filed to be placed on record in
Commercial Suit No. 23 of 2021".

1/2

akn

2/2

23.WP.10833.2023 .doc

¶21

3.It appears that by Order dated 8 February, 2022, Petitioner’s
application praying time to file Written Statement was rejected.

¶22

4.Learned Counsel for the sole Respondent states that he has no
objection if the prayer clause (B) is granted. Hence, the Petition is allowed in
terms of prayer clause (B) only, as mentioned above.

¶23

5. All contentions of both the parties in the application for condonation of delay referred in prayer clause (B) above, are kept open.

¶24

6. Considering the fact that on 5 September, 2023, this Court had

¶25

granted stay to the further proceedings of Commercial Suit No. 23 of 2021
pending before the District Court, Pune and further considering the fact that
now the District Court is directed to hear the Application for condonation of
delay, the said stay shall continue till the application for condonation of
delay is heard.

¶26

7. The Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms. No order as to the

¶27

costs.

¶28

(M. M. SATHAYE, J.)

¶29

2/2

¶30

akn

Sadbhav Infrastructure Project Ltd. v. Swarna Buildcon Pvt.Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadbhav Infrastructure Project Ltd. v. Swarna Buildcon Pvt.Ltd.

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

Rbl Bank Limited vs Sohanlal v Jain

Anita Vidyadhar Haval vs Shri. Baliram Pandurang Kavade and Ors.

Anita Vidyadhar Haval vs Shri. Baliram Pandurang Kavade and Ors.

Tata Aig General Insurance Company Limited, Pune vs Smt. Shridevi Vijay Tankale and Ors.

Vijay Enterprises Thr Its Authorized Partner Vs Sab Developers Thr Its Authorized Partner and Anr.

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.,Thane vs Dhondji Biraji Gurkhe and Ors.