Gujarat High Court High Court

Ahmedabad vs Satish on 15 October, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Ahmedabad vs Satish on 15 October, 2008
Author: R.P.Dholakia,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CA/138120/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY No. 1381 of 2008
 

In


 

FIRST
APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 4006 of 2007
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

AHMEDABAD
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

SATISH
BALDEVBHAI RATHOD C/O KAUSHAL INDUSTRIES - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MS
JIRGA D JHAVERI for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR
NISHITH P THAKKAR for
Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLAKIA
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
		
	

 

Date
: 15/10/2008 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLAKIA)

This
Civil Application has been filed by the present
applicant-original respondent for condoning the delay of 225 days
caused in preferring First Appeal.

Initially
rule was issued but it could not be served and hence, fresh notice
was issued permitting direct service and in pursuance of that, the
opponent is served and has appeared through his advocate, Mr.Nishit
P.Thakkar. However, he is not present when the matter is called out.

We
have heard learned counsel for the applicant and also gone
through the reasons mentioned in the Civil Application on oath
regarding condonation of delay. Reasons as to why appeal could
not be filed in time are stated in para 2 of the application.

In
view of the fact that the reasons stated in this application
have not been controverted by the otherside by filing an
affidavit or by remaining present in court and also in view of the
principles governing the discretionary exercise of power under
Sec.5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, we are of the view that
sufficient cause has been stated for not filing the appeal in time
and hence, delay of 225 days caused in filing appeal is to be
condoned and civil application is required to be allowed.

For
the aforesaid reasons, application is allowed. Delay of
225 days caused in filing First Appeal is condoned. Rule is made
absolute.

(R.P.DHOLAKIA,J)

(Z.K.SAIYED,J.)

radhan/

   

Top