Gujarat High Court
Rashmikaben Wd/O Mukeshbhai Parmar vs Ramjibhai Mohanbhai Lunadaria on 3 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/469/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 469
of 2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 22661 of 2023
==========================================================
RASHMIKABEN WD/O MUKESHBHAI PARMAR & ORS.
Versus
RAMJIBHAI MOHANBHAI LUNADARIA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRASHANT MANKAD(2189) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MASUMI V NANAVATY(9321) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
UNSERVED EXPIRED (R) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 03/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application has been preferred for seeking condonation of delay of 423 days caused in preferring the appeal against the impugned judgment and award.
2. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
3. Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that the delay of 423 days has occasioned in preferring the appeal owing to the reasons that the person of the family who has to take the decision for preferring the appeal is aged about 90 years and further owing to the reasons of the poverty of the applicants, the applicants could not arrange the finance for paying the court fees and other expenses involved in preferring the appeal. He further submitted that the applicants will not claim any interest Page 1 of 2 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Oct 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 07 00:54:24 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/469/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025 undefined for the delayed period, in case the appeal for enhancement is allowed. He further submitted that the appellant no.4 has also filed the affidavit/undertaking to that effect on record. He further submitted that the delay is neither intentional nor malafide but occasioned owing to the reasons as stated in the application.
4. On the other hand, learned advocate Ms Masumi V. Nanavaty appearing on behalf of the respondent no.2 submitted that considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, appropriate order may be passed.
5. Having considered the submissions of the learned advocates for the parties and having regard to the ground for delay pressed into service, I am of the considered view that the delay has been sufficiently explained and the same deserves to be condoned. Accordingly, the delay is condoned subject to the condition that the claimants shall not be entitled for the interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, in case the appeal is allowed. No order as to costs. The present application is disposed of.
6. Registry is directed to reflect the name of learned advocate Ms Masumi V. Nanavaty on behalf of respondent no.2 in the First Appeal.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J) CDP Page 2 of 2 Uploaded by MR.CHIRAG DESHRAJ PAL(HCD0072) on Sat Oct 04 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 07 00:54:24 IST 2025