Procedural defaults under Original Side Rules were excused in public interest, with time granted to cure office objections.

The Bombay HC considered whether delay in curing office objections and failure to comply with procedural requirements under Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980 should be excused. Although the explanation in the affidavit was found inadequate and the Court criticised the lack of coordination between the department and its advocates, it accepted the explanation in the larger public interest to avoid disposal on procedural default alone. The Revenue was granted four weeks to remove all office objections and regularise compliance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the explanation for the delay and failure to remove office objections should be accepted and time granted to comply with the procedural requirements under Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980.

Analysis: The motions arose from the Revenue's failure to comply with procedural requirements even after the delay in filing the appeals had been condoned. The Court found that the affidavit placed an inadequate explanation for the lapses and criticised the lack of coordination between the departmental and their advocates. However, in the larger public interest and to avoid defeating the matters on procedural defaults alone, the Court accepted the explanation and permitted further time to cure the office objections.

Conclusion: The explanation was accepted and the Revenue was granted four weeks' time to remove all office objections.

---