Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
MCA/972/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR RESTORATION No. 972 of 2011
In
SECOND
APPEAL No. 24 of 1993
=========================================================
KALACHAND
HEMRAJ KISHNANI - Applicant(s)
Versus
ISMAIL
AMIN & 3 - Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
VH DESAI for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR RC KAKKAD for Opponent(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2,
1.2.3,1.2.4
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 20/07/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard
learned advocate Ms.Tejal Vashi with learned advocate Mr.Vijay
H.Desai appearing on behalf of applicant and learned advocate
Mr.R.C.Kakkad appearing on behalf of opponents.
2. In
this application, prayer is made to restore Second Appeal No.24 of
1993 and also to condone delay of 85 days in filing such application.
This Court has passed order on 22.11.2010 in Second Appeal No.24 of
1993 which has been quoted as under.
“Learned
advocate Mr. V.H. Desai is appearing on behalf of appellant and
learned advocate Mr. R.C. Kakkad is appearing on behalf of
respondents.
Today,
when the matter is called out in first sessions, learned advocate Mr.
Desai is not remained present before this Court. No body has
mentioned this matter to adjourn this matter on behalf of learned
advocate Mr. Desai. Neither sick note nor leave note is filed by
learned advocate Mr. Desai. Even in second session also, learned
advocate Mr. Desai is not remained present before this Court.
However,
learned advocate Mr. R.C. Kakkad is remained present before this
Court on both occasions.
This
being a very old matter of 1993 which is pending before this Court
for about 17 years. Therefore, in light of this background, this
Court has no option except to dismiss the matter in default.
Accordingly,
present second appeal is dismissed in default.”
3. In
view of aforesaid order passed by this Court, Second Appeal has been
dismissed in default. For that, I have considered submissions made
by both learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties.
Considering reasons given in present application, delay of 85 days is
condoned in interest of justice as sufficient cause has been shown by
applicant to satisfaction of Court. Therefore, order passed by this
Court on 22.11.2010 in Second Appeal No.24 of 1993 is recalled and
Second Appeal No.24 of 1993 is restored to original file with all
attached orders. Accordingly, present application is disposed of by
this Court.
(H.K.RATHOD,J)
pathan
Top