Court revives appeal after delay, citing unintentional delay and Counsel's lapse. The High Court of Bombay allowed the civil application for condonation of delay, noting the delay was not intentional. The court set aside the order of ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Court revives appeal after delay, citing unintentional delay and Counsel's lapse.
The High Court of Bombay allowed the civil application for condonation of delay, noting the delay was not intentional. The court set aside the order of dismissal of the appeal, considering the lapse on the part of the office of the Counsel for the applicant. The First Appeal was restored to the file, deemed ready for final hearing, and added to the board of final hearing matters.
Issues: Condonation of delay in filing civil application, Setting aside order of dismissal of appeal
In the present judgment by the High Court of Bombay, the issues revolve around the condonation of delay in filing a civil application and setting aside the order of dismissal of an appeal. The court, comprising N.V. Dabholkar and M.G. Gaikwad, JJ., heard arguments from the Assistant Solicitor General for the applicant and Advocate Shri A.P. Basarkar for the respondent.
Regarding the delay of 35 days in filing the civil application, the court noted that the delay was not intentional or mala fide. Although Advocate Shri Basarkar opposed the condonation of delay, the court found that the reasons for the delay were explained in the application. Consequently, the civil application for condonation of delay was allowed, and the delay was condoned.
In the context of setting aside the order of dismissal of the appeal, the court observed that the parent appeal had already been admitted but further steps were not taken for effecting service to the sole respondent. Advocate Shri Basarkar vehemently opposed setting aside the dismissal order. However, the court considered the grounds cited in the application, which indicated a lapse on the part of the office of the Counsel for the applicant or his staff. The court held that the applicant should not suffer due to this lapse and allowed the civil application. As a result, the First Appeal was restored to the file with the original order date, deemed ready for final hearing, and added to the board of final hearing matters.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
