Yuvrajsinh Ratansinh Rathod vs State Of Gujarat

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 8160 Guj
Judgement Date : 8 November, 2023

Gujarat High Court
Yuvrajsinh Ratansinh Rathod vs State Of Gujarat on 8 November, 2023
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
                                                                                  NEUTRAL CITATION




       C/CA/1427/2023                             ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023

                                                                                   undefined




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1427 of
                             2023
          In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 27784 of 2023
==========================================================
                        YUVRAJSINH RATANSINH RATHOD
                                   Versus
                             STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DG SHUKLA(1998) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARSHEEL D SHUKLA(6158) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. SHRUTI DHRUVE, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. SUDHIR NANAVATI, SR. ADV. WITH MR VANDAN K BAXI(5863) for
the Respondent(s) No. 2,4
NANAVATI & NANAVATI(1933) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,4
MR. VIKAS NAIR, ADVOCATE FOR the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
           and
           HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
           MANAVENDRANATH ROY

                       Date : 08/11/2023
                        ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA) Heard learned advocate Mr. D.G.Shukla for the applicant, learned senior advocate Mr. Sudhir Nanavati with learned advocate Mr. Vandan Baxi for respondent No.2 and 4, learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Shruti Dhruve for respondent No.1 State and learned advocate Mr. Vikas Nair for respondent No.3 University, who stated that he has instructions to appear on behalf of respondent No.3 and that he would be filling vakalatnama within one week.

2. It is condone the delay of 100 days which has taken place in preferring the Letters Patent Appeal, that the present Civil Application is filed by the applicant-original petitioner. Judgment and order of learned Page 1 of 2 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 10 20:55:04 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1427/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023 undefined single Judge was delivered on 5.5.2023 deciding the Special Civil Application. Thereafter, it was stated that the clerk of the learned advocate applied for certified copy, which was after summer vacation since it intervened. The copy was available on 19.6.2023.

3. Thereafter, the following averments are made for passage of time in para 4 of the application, "The applicant after receiving the certified copy approached the advocate in the last week of August, 2023, as he was out of town for few weeks and therefore, he could not contact his advocate. Therefore, the certified copy and papers were handed over to the advocate for drafting the Letters Patent Appeal. The Letters Patent Appeal was drafted in the First Week of September, 2023, and therefore, the Letters Patent Appeal could not be filed in time and there is technical delay occurred in filling the Letters Patent Appeal."

4. The reasons given do not reflect that any indolence or negligence could be attributed to the applicant in whiling away the time. The intention to file appeal was evident.

5. Sufficient cause is made out. Delay is condoned. Rule is made absolute.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J) (CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J) C.M. JOSHI Page 2 of 2 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 10 20:55:04 IST 2023