Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/8173/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 8173 of 2010
To
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 8246 of 2010
In
FIRST
APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2582 of 2009
TO
FIRST
APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2655 of 2009
======================================
MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF AHMEDABAD
Versus
JIGAR
TRADERS
======================================
Appearance :
M/S
RJ RAWAL ASSOCIATES & MS SHIVYA A DESAI for Applicant
MR GM
JOSHI for Respondent
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
Date
: 30/08/2010
COMMON
ORAL ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA)
1 By
filing instant batch of 74 Applications under Section-5 of the
Limitation Act,1963 ( the Act for short), the applicant
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad, has prayed
to condone delay of 72 days caused in filing the above stamp
numbered First Appeals, which are directed against the judgment and
order dated 10.02.2009, rendered in group of Municipal Valuation
Appeals, by the learned Judge, Small Cause Court No.4, Ahmedabad,
by which the Municipal Valuation Appeals preferred by respondents of
each applications challenging the valuation of their property
came to be allowed and the valuation assessed for their property
has been set aside.
2 The
reasons as to why the Appeals could not be filed in time are
detailed in paragraph 2 of the applications. It is inter alia
stated that because of intra-department and inter-department
procedure for obtaining sanction from the competent officer in the
office of the Municipal Commissioner (Tax), Ahmedabad Municipal
Corporation, to file appeals, considerable time is consumed and after
obtaining sanction, the appeals have been drafted and in the said
process also, considerable time has been spent and, therefore, the
delay has been occurred. It is, therefore, prayed to condone the
delay.
3 Having
considered the averments made in the applications, which is
supported by an affidavit sworn by Shri Kelvin Chandravadan Kapadia,
Deputy Assessor and Tax Collector, in the office of the Municipal
Commissioner, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, this Court has no
reason to disbelieve the affidavit sworn by a public officer and
also considering the celebrated principles governing the
discretionary exercise of power conferred under Section-5 of the
Act, so also the reported decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
construing Section 5 of the Act liberally, we are of the considered
opinion that, delay caused in filing the above stamp numbered First
Appeals has been aptly, elaborately and sufficiently explained. The
record does not indicate that there was inaction or negligence on
the part of the applicant in prosecuting the Appeals. The applicant
has never abandoned the lis. The explanation for condonation of
delay offered by the applicant is not only plausible but
acceptable.
4 Seen
in the above context, the instant batch of 74 applications seeking
condonation of delay deserves to be allowed by condoning the delay
as prayed for.
5 For
the foregoing reasons, instant batch of 74 applications succeeds and
accordingly they are allowed. Delay of 72 days caused in
filing the above stamp numbered First Appeals is condoned.
6 Rule
made absolute in each of the applications with no order as to costs.
(A.M.KAPADIA,
J.)
(J.C.UPADHYAYA,
J.)
pnnair
Top