Gujarat High Court
Jayprakash Jayantilal Dalal vs Dena Bank (Now Amalgamated With Bank Of ... on 17 July, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3677/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3677 of
2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 20486 of 2025
==========================================================
JAYPRAKASH JAYANTILAL DALAL
Versus
DENA BANK (NOW AMALGAMATED WITH BANK OF BARODA) & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
ORTIS LAW OFFICES(12342) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Date : 17/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 97 days in filing the captioned appeal.
2. Learned Advocate for the applicant in support of his submissions has invited the attention of this Court to paragraph Nos.4 to 6 and 8 of the application which reads thus:
"4. After pronouncement of the impugned judgment on 20.02.2025, the Applicant an aged retired employee residing in Bhavnagar under the bona fide belief that his case might still be considered for retiral benefits administratively by the Respondent Bank, especially in light of the contradictory communications dated 13.04.2009 and 27.05.2009 issued by the Bank, inviting him to submit pension and terminal benefit claims.
Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 18 23:56:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/3677/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025 undefined
5. The Applicant, being an elderly person not well-versed with legal intricacies, required time to collect certified copies, collate documentary records, and consult advocates in Ahmedabad, which took considerable time and coordination due to geographical and logistical limitations.
6. Further, in the intervening period, the Applicant made earnest efforts to pursue internal representations and inquiries regarding the pension scheme and eligibility under the Dena Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995, and the Bipartite Settlement dated 11.11.2020, thereby exhausting possible administrative remedies before approaching this Hon'ble Court.
xxx xxx xxx
8. That in addition to the above, the Applicant was, during the intervening period after the pronouncement of the impugned judgment, unfortunately diagnosed with a serious medical ailment which required immediate and aggressive medical intervention including hospitalization and surgery. The Applicant was compelled to undergo a series of diagnostic procedures, surgical treatment, and post-operative care, which not only consumed significant time but also debilitated him physically and emotionally, rendering him incapable of immediately initiating appellate proceedings....."
3. Learned Advocate Mr.Patel for the respondent has submitted that in fact the delay is not properly explained by the applicant and therefore this Court may not condone the delay.
Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 18 23:56:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/3677/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025 undefined
4. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the reasons as mentioned in the afore-mentioned paragraph, delay of 97 days caused in preferring the appeal is condoned. Registry to list the captioned appeal in seriatim.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) (R. T. VACHHANI, J) sompura Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Jul 18 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 18 23:56:21 IST 2025