Petitioners sought recall of an order proceeding without reply to a Summons for Judgment and leave to defend, 496 days after its service, citing a pending maintainability challenge and the Covid-19 pandemic. The court held the Trial Court's rejection was not perverse and dismissed the writ petitions.
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.
2-wp1984-2024&Anr..doc
VRJ
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1984 OF 2024
VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Digitally signed byVAIBHAV RAMESHJADHAVDate: 2024.07.0119:10:18 +0530
Chandan Store (D.D) & Ors. … Petitioners V/s. Hina Shishir Chheda Through Her Constituted Attorney Jayesh Ratilal Gada … Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.1986 OF 2024
Chandan Store (D.D) & Ors. … Petitioners V/s. Jayesh Ratilal Gada … Respondent
Mr. Yogendra M. Kanchan i/by YMK Legal for the petitioners.
Ms. Janhavee Joshi i/by Mr. Manish P. Jagani for the respondent.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : JULY 1, 2024
P.C.:
1
2-wp1984-2024&Anr..doc
the date of Summons for Judgment.
2
2-wp1984-2024&Anr..doc
petitioners as the Summons for Judgment was served on the petitioners on 25 October 2018 and the Notice of Motion was filed after the period of 496 days.
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Trial Court rightly rejected condonation of delay for seeking leave to defend 496 days after service of Summons for Judgment.
Chandan Store (D.D) & Ors.
Hina Shishir Chheda Through Her Constituted Attorney Jayesh Ratilal Gada
Jayesh Ratilal Gada
Amit Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
4 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
