Chamber Appeal to set aside an order non-compliance to registry objections allowing appellant. Court considered the delay reasonable and allowed appeal subject to cost.
Chamber Appeal allowed; Special Appeal S.A. (D) 920 of 2023 to be registered after compliance; Rs.2500/- cost payable to DRT Bar Association.
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.
| 26.02.2026 | Exh. | Roznama-MDRT-II C.A. No.07 of 2024 |
Next date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mr Aayush Kothari i/b M/s. Dhruve Liladhar & Co., Advocate for the Appellants. None for Respondents. The Appellants filed Chamber Appeal praying to set aside the Order dated 04.04.2024 passed by the Ld. Registrar and to restore the S.A. (D) 920 of 2023 filed on 26.05.2023. Ld. Advocate for the Appellants submitted that he approached the Registry on 06.10.2023 when it came to the knowledge that in September 2023, office objections had been raised by the Registry in the matter. Ld. Advocate further submitted that majority of the objections raised were relates to unclear copies of documents annexed to the S.A. He further submitted that clear copies of certain documents were not available with the Appellants as the same were in the custody of Respondent No.1 and due to unavailability of clearer copies, the Advocate for the Appellants could not type the same. The Advocate for the Appellants also exchange email correspondence. This shows that the Appellants were diligent enough to comply with the office objections. |
|||
| Ld. Advocate for the Appellants also submitted that another reason for not complying the office objections within time is that the connected SAs filed before this Tribunal were also simultaneously complying with which are runninginto multiple volumes andpages. |
Page 1 of 2
| rst - 06 | Therefore, the Appellants was under an impression that the above S.A. shall be listed along with the connect matters on 15.04.2024. Ld. Advocate for the Appellants submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances, S.A. could not be numbered and registered. Hence, seeks two weeks’ time to comply with the further procedures to get the S.A. (D) No.920 of 2023 registered. Heard counsel for the Applicant in Chamber Appeal No.7 of 2024 and perused the record. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, the reasons shown by the Appellant seem to be reliable and believable regarding the non- compliance of the office objections in the S.A. (D) No.920 of 2023 within time. Resultantly, Chamber Appeal No.7 of 2024 is allowed subject to cost quantified in the sum of Rs.2500/- payable to DRT Bar Association, Mumbai for purchase of books and periodicals. S.A. (D) No.920 of 2023 be registered after due compliance. File of this C.A. be consigned to the Record Room after due compliance. Sd/- P.O. DRT-II |
Closed |
|---|
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to set aside the order allowing a delay in complying with registry objections to a Special Appeal.
Mr Aayush Kothari i/b M/s. Dhruve Liladhar & Co.
Respondents
P.O.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
