Shripati Gundu Naik and Anr. vs Bhagwan Kedarnath Mishra Since Deceased Thr. Lrs. 1A. Deep Nara Yan Mishra and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shripati Gundu Naik and Anr. vs Bhagwan Kedarnath Mishra Since Deceased Thr. Lrs. 1A. Deep Nara Yan Mishra and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application allowed and delay of 236 days in filing First Appeal (ST) No. 37156 of 2024 condoned, subject to Applicants paying costs of Rs.25,000/- to Respondent No.1(a) (Mr. Deep Narayan Mishra) on behalf of all Respondent Nos. 1(a) to 1(e) within 4 weeks, directly in his favour, with proof submitted to the Registry within the same time-frame; failing timely payment, the delay will not be condoned.

Issue for consideration

Whether sufficient cause is made out to condone a delay of 236 days in filing First Appeal (ST) No. 37156 of 2024. +1 more

Court's answer

Affirmation of the condonation application in August 2024 indicated clear intention to file the appeal, supporting condonation even though the appeal was ultimately lodged in December 2024.

Ratio / Principle

In dealing with a belatedly-filed substantive first appeal (the last fact-finding court for the dispute), the Court must balance that circumstance against the valuable right accruing to the successful party once the limitation period is over.

Key takeaways

A lenient approach is necessary for advancement of substantial justice, and the extent of delay can be compensated by an order of costs.ratio¶22
On the circumstances narrated, sufficient cause was made out for condonation of the delay, but subject to costs.ratio¶23
The condonation is conditional: costs of Rs.25,000/- are to be paid to Respondent No.1(a) within 4 weeks, and if the costs are not paid in time, the delay will not stand condoned.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (M.M. Sathaye, J., 14 August 2025) allowed Interim Application No. 3382 of 2025 in First Appeal (ST) No. 37156 of 2024 seeking condonation of 236 days' delay in filing the appeal against an impugned judgment passed on 26.03.2024 and signed on 06.04.2024. Though the certified copy was applied for belatedly (27.06.2024) and the appeal was lodged only in December 2024, the Court held that affirmation of the application in August 2024 showed clear intention to appeal, and that a lenient approach was necessary for advancement of substantial justice, balancing the nature of a first appeal as the last fact-finding court against the valuable right accruing to the successful party on expiry of limitation. Condonation was granted subject to payment of Rs.25,000/- as costs to Respondent No.1(a) (Deep Narayan Mishra) on behalf of all Respondent Nos. 1(a) to 1(e) within 4 weeks, proof to the Registry; failing timely payment, the delay will not be condoned.

8-IA-3382-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3382 OF 2025 IN

FIRST APPEAL(ST) NO. 37156 OF 2024

Shripati Gundu Naik And Anr ...Applicants Versus Bhagwan Kedarnath Mishra (Since Deceased) Thr. ...Respondents Lrs. 1a. Deep Narayan Mishra And Ors.

SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN

Digitally signed by SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Date: 2025.08.18 11:14:05 +0530

Mr. Aniket Ranade a/w Aditya Patil for the Applicants. Mr. Pradeep Patil i/b Komal Punjabi for Respondent No.2/BMC. Mr. R.R. Oja i/b Mr. A.R. Pande for Respondent Nos. 1(a) to 1(e).

CORAM : M.M. SATHAYE, J. DATE : 14^th AUGUST, 2025

P.C. :

Heard learned advocate for the Applicants and learned advocate for Respondent Nos. 1a to 1e and Respondent No.2/ Municipal Corporation.

The application is filed for condonation of delay of 236 days in filing First Appeal. The application states that the Applicants did not receive the intimation of the impugned order and therefore, delay is caused in filing the appeal.

Perused the application and impugned judgment. It appears that impugned judgment was passed on 26.03.2024, however, it was signed on 06.04.2024. The certified copy itself was applied belatedly on 27.06.2024 after a period of about 3 months. The certified copy was collected on 28.06.2024. Delay condonation application was affirmed on 29.08.2024 but ultimately the appeal is filed in December 2024.

Learned Counsel for the contesting Respondents contended that the delay in applying certified copy and delay in actual filing of first appeal is not

Sneha Chavan

1/2

8-IA-3382-2025.doc

satisfactorily explained.

The Court cannot loose site of the fact that the proceedings which are filed belatedly are in nature of substantive first appeal, which is last factfinding court for the dispute between the parties. But at the same time, a valuable right accrues to successful party once limitation period is over. Therefore these factors need balancing.

It is important to note that the Applicant had already affirmed the application in August 2024, which indicates clear intention of filing necessary appeal in August 2024 itself. But for the reasons, which this Court does not wish to comment upon, actual appeal seems to have been lodged in Deceased 2024. Lenient approach is necessary to be adopted for advancement of substantial justice. Considering the extent of delay, it can be compensated by necessary order of costs.

Considering the circumstances narrated above, sufficient cause is made out for delay condonation, but with costs.

Hence, subject to Applicant paying costs of Rs.25,000/- to Respondent No.1(a) (Mr. Deep Narayan Mishra) who will accept the same on behalf of all Respondent Nos. 1(a) to 1(e), within a period of 4 weeks from today, this application is allowed, delay is condoned.

Payment of costs to be made directly in favour of Respondent No. 1(a) and its proof be submitted to the Registry within same time-frame.

Needless to mention that if costs are not paid in time, delay will not be condoned.

(M.M. SATHAYE, J.)

Sneha Chavan

2/2