Gujarat High Court
Avniben Kumarpal Patel vs Kumarpal Jagdishchandra Patel on 16 October, 2025
Author: Sangeeta K. Vishen
Bench: Sangeeta K. Vishen
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/5243/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 5243 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 30436 of 2025
==========================================================
AVNIBEN KUMARPAL PATEL
Versus
KUMARPAL JAGDISHCHANDRA PATEL
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRITHVIRAJSINGH R. JADEJA FOR MR HARSHADRAY A DAVE(3461)
for the Applicant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 16/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN)
1. By this application, the applicant has prayed for condoning the delay of 38 days caused in preferring the captioned first appeal.
2. Mr Prithvirajsingh R. Jadeja, learned advocate for Mr Harshadray A. Dave, learned advocate for the applicant has made submissions along the lines of the averments made in the application. It is submitted that the applicant, was not properly informed by the advocate and hence, virtually, the proceedings have been initiated ex-parte. It is urged that since the applicant was not aware about the outcome of the judgment, steps could not be taken in time. In the process, there occurred a delay of 38 days. Request is made that the delay being bona fide, may be condoned.
3. Having regard to the averments made so also the oral submissions, this Court, is of the opinion that the delay has been sufficiently explained. The applicant appears to have taken steps by approaching the learned advocate representing her. Upon receipt of the certified copy, the applicant again approached the learned Page 1 of 2 Uploaded by RAVI PRAVINCHANDRA PATEL(HC01068) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 06:26:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/5243/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined advocate, thereafter, the pleadings were drafted. Draft of the appeal was prepared, finalized and filed. Considering the quantum as well as the explanation, this Court, is of the opinion that the delay of 38 days caused in filing the captioned appeal deserves to be condoned at the threshold and is hereby condoned.
4. Civil application succeeds and is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs.
(SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J) (NISHA M. THAKORE,J) RAVI P. PATEL Page 2 of 2 Uploaded by RAVI PRAVINCHANDRA PATEL(HC01068) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 06:26:36 IST 2025