Dismissed

Anandiben W/O Ramanlal Brahmbhatt Thru Poa Naliniben Barot v. Manojbhai Kachiya

Gujarat HC7 Feb 2020CA/930/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses the applicant's prayer for condonation of delay in appealing an interim order. The court rejected the explanation that the advocate failed to inform the applicant of the order, noting she had filed an amended plaint shortly thereafter, thereby proving she was in touch with the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal was rejected.

Anandiben W/O Ramanlal Brahmbhatt Thru Poa… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gujarat HC (2020)

¶1

C/CA/930/2019 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 930 of 2019 In F/APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 8717 of 2019

¶3

With

¶4

F/APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 8717 of 2019

¶5

================================================================ ANANDIBEN W/O RAMANLAL BRAHMBHATT THRU POA NALINIBEN BAROT

¶6

Versus

¶7

MANOJBHAI KACHIYA

¶8

=============================================================== Appearance:

¶9

MR YV BRAHMBHATT(206) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2 NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 NOTICE UNSERVED(8) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶10

================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.UDHWANI

¶11

Date : 07/02/2020

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

The opponent no.1 is not served. It is stated that he is the tenant having nothing to do with the dispute between the brothers and sisters and as such no relief was prayed against him and no orders are sought in these proceedings against him. Learned counsel therefore seeks to delete him. Opponent No.1 shall stand deleted.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicants is permitted to score out applicant no.1/appellant no.1 (since deceased was being represented by her power of attorney applicant no.2/appellant no.2 herein) as she can no more be represented by applicant no.2/appellant no.2 who incidentally is also her heir.

¶15

In the proposed Appeal from order, order dated 27.04.2018 rendered by the learned 11^th Additional Senior Civil Judge below Exh. 5 in Regular Civil Suit No. 343 of 2016 is sought to be assailed with a

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

C/CA/930/2019 ORDER

¶18

delay of 207 days with following explanation:

¶19

“3. That the advocate of the applicants could not remain present in the court at the time of deciding Exh. 5 application and in absence of advocate the said application is decided. The applicant is only informed in the end of month pf February 2019 and after receiving papers the applicants prefer this appeal from order by contacting an advocate.”

¶20

Since the aforesaid explanation was found to be deficient in material particulars, an opportunity was given to the applicant to place the better particulars explaining the delay and accordingly affidavit is filed on 01.07.2019 with the following substantial averments in paragraph 4.

¶21

“4. The mother of applicant No.2- i.e Applicant No. 1 has passed away on 03.03.2018 so applicant was not knowing and until February 2019 the advocate could not inform applicant no.2 as she was not in touch.”

¶22

Thus again the reiteration is that his advocate did not inform her about the impugned order. This fact does not appear to be true since; as brought to the notice of this court by opponent no.3; within two months of the impugned order an amended plaint was signed and submitted by the applicant Naliniben Barot. Thus she was aware of the proceedings and in touch with the advocate concerned. It is therefore difficult to believe that the advocate did not inform her about the impugned order. No case is made out for condonation of delay. Application is rejected.

¶23

(G.R.UDHWANI, J)

¶24

niru*

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Anandiben W/O Ramanlal Brahmbhatt Thru Poa Naliniben Barot v. Manojbhai Kachiya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anandiben W/O Ramanlal Brahmbhatt Thru Poa Naliniben Barot v. Manojbhai Kachiya

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

Dineshbhai Ganeshbhai Vankar Vs Registrar Gujarat Vidhyapith

Navitas Life Sciences Represented by Director/Auth. Signatory Shalini Daga Vs Sarjen Systems Pvt. Ltd.

Bhalaji Chunthaji-Decd. through Legal Heirs, Vs Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation

Ratilal Becharbhai Patel Vs Chimanbhai Chaturbhai Parmar

Hemali Manishbhai Bhatt @ D/O Mahendrabhai Vishnubhai Vs Manish Pradyuman Bhatt

Chandrakant Dhirubahi Patel Vs Suraj Prakash Bhagat