Gujarat High Court
Sachindra Vishrambhai Gupta vs Bhagwansingh Kedarsingh Gurjar on 3 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/597/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.
597 of 2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 36562 of 2024
=============================================
SACHINDRA VISHRAMBHAI GUPTA
Versus
BHAGWANSINGH KEDARSINGH GURJAR
=============================================
Appearance:
MR HARNISH V DARJI(3705) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
ADITYA R GUNDECHA(8869) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 03/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Harnish Darji, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. Aditya Gundecha, learned advocate who has appeared on caveat on behalf of respondent no.1. Issue rule making it returnable forthwith. Mr. Gundecha, learned advocate waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent no.1.
2. Present application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 20 days caused in preferring the captioned appeal.
3. Mr.Darji, learned advocate for the applicant has invited attention of this Court to the averments made in the application and has submitted that after pronouncement of judgment and award on 3.10.2024, the certified copy of the impugned judgment was applied for, which was ready on 22.10.2024. After obtaining the certified copy, applicant has sought legal advise to avail appropriate legal remedy Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Mon Feb 03 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 03 23:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/597/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2025 undefined available under law. The applicant had approached to the learned advocate of High Court who had asked him to come with all the necessary bunch of papers and evidence produced on record were provided to the learned advocate. The time was consumed in drafting appeal and presenting appeal and in the process, delay of 20 days have been crept in. By referring to the aforesaid events, learned advocate has submitted that applicant was pursuing his case with due diligence in approaching the Court within prescribed period of Limitation, however due to circumstances beyond his control, delay has occurred. He has further pointed out that he has good case on merits and he may not be thrown out on technical ground of delay. He has therefore, requested to condone the delay.
4. Learned advocate for the respondent could not controvert the aforesaid submissions made by the learned advocate for the applicant, however has objected to condone the delay. According to him, explanation offered does not make a sufficient cause.
5. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and having perused the averments made in the application, the fact remains that the applicant all throughout pursuing the matter to approach in appeal. Hence, there is no negligency on the part of the applicant in not preferring captioned appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. The Court is inclined to exercise its Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Mon Feb 03 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 03 23:21:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/597/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2025 undefined discretion as sufficient cause is made out to condone the delay. Hence, present application succeeds and is hereby allowed. The delay caused in preferring the captioned appeal is hereby condoned. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No costs.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH JILUSINH(HC00957) on Mon Feb 03 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 03 23:21:18 IST 2025