NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1442/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1442 of
2023
In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 35609 of 2022
With
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 35609 of 2022
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14335 of 2018
==========================================================
M/S ANJANI IMPEX
Versus
GENERAL MANAGER, CANARA BANK
==========================================================
Appearance:
DR BALRAM D JAIN(3146) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 10/10/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. The present appeal is delayed by 44 days in challenging the order dated 05.08.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge. Though we are not convinced with the explanation offered by learned counsel for the appellant to explain for the delay in filing the instant appeal, however entering into the merits of the judgment and order dated 05.08.2022, we Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 11 20:41:59 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1442/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2023 undefined may record that by the said order, the restoration application filed by the appellant herein with the delay of 412 days was rejected as the Court was not convinced to condone the delay on the explanation offered therein. Challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge, it is sought to be submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the explanation offered by the appellant in the application for restoration was such as it could not have been rejected by the learned Single Judge, for the reason that the copy of the order passed by the Consumer Forum, Surat, as was directed to be produced by the learned Single Judge, was not relevant to decide the controversy at the end.
2. We are afraid to accept the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant for the same reason that the challenge before us is to the order of the dismissal of the restoration application. The order of dismissal of the writ petition is not subject matter of challenge in the instant appeal. A perusal of the restoration application indicates that the applicant has only stated that since the copy of the judgment of the Consumer Forum, Surat, was not provided to him, by the trial court advocate, the same could not be given to the counsel appearing for the writ court. The said explanation cannot be treated as sufficient. No infirmity could be found in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 11 20:41:59 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1442/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/10/2023 undefined
The present appeal is dismissed being misconceived both on the ground of delay as well as on merits.
3. The oral request made by the learned counsel for the appellant for suspension of this order is hereby rejected.
Sd/-
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ ) Sd/-
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.) ABHISHEK Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Oct 11 20:41:59 IST 2023