Gujarat High Court
Pramilaben Wd/O Rajnikant Harilal Shah vs Dilipbhai Harilal Shah Since Deceased ... on 25 September, 2025
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4709/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 4709 of
2024
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 25577 of 2024
==========================================================
PRAMILABEN WD/O RAJNIKANT HARILAL SHAH & ORS.
Versus
DILIPBHAI HARILAL SHAH SINCE DECEASED THROUGH HIS LEGAL
HEIRS & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. VISHRUT R JANI(6696) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,3.1,3.2
A S TIMBALIA(7372) for the Respondent(s) No. 1.1,2
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Respondent(s) No. 1.2,1.3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
Date : 25/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE)
1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 219 days in preferring the appeal against the order dated 23.10.2023 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nadiad in Special Civil Suit No.54 of 2012.
2. It is reported that the rule is served however, none has appeared on behalf of the respondent.
3. Learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the contents of paras No.3 and 4 of the Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by EZHURHASSAN SUDHIR ACHUTHAN(HC00192) on Fri Sep 26 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 27 02:06:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4709/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined application, wherein it stated that the impugned decree was drawn on 27.10.2023. Certified copy of the judgement and decree was applied on 01.02.2024 and received on 02.02.2024. Thereafter, the applicants tried to settle the issue with the respondents as they respondents are family members and blood relatives. However, all the efforts made by the appellants had gone in vein. Therefore, in the process of obtaining all necessary records of the suit and hiring an advocate, a delay of 219 days has caused in filing the present First Appeal challenging the order impugned. The applicant further states that balance of convenience lies in favour of the applicant and he has a strong prima facie case. The applicant also submits that there is no willful lethargy or negligence on the part of the applicant in preferring the present First Appeal.
4. Therefore, learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the reasons for which delay has occurred.
5. Considering the aforesaid, particularly, period of 219 days of delay, the Court is of the view that considering the facts involved in the case, delay cannot be treated as inordinate.
6. Considering the submissions and the contents of the para mentioned hereinabove, the delay is also Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by EZHURHASSAN SUDHIR ACHUTHAN(HC00192) on Fri Sep 26 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 27 02:06:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4709/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 undefined explained sufficiently.
7. A reference in this regard may be made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Sheo Raj Singh (Deceased) through Legal Representatives and others vs/. Union of India and Another, reported in, (2023) 10 SCC 531, wherein the term "Sufficient Cause" was interpreted and the approach of Courts while deciding application for condonation of delay was discussed.
8. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.
The delay of 219 days caused in preferring the appeal against the order dated 23.10.2023 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nadiad in Special Civil Suit No.54 of 2012 is hereby condoned. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Registry is directed to list the main appeal in due course.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) (J. L. ODEDRA, J) SUDHIR Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by EZHURHASSAN SUDHIR ACHUTHAN(HC00192) on Fri Sep 26 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 27 02:06:27 IST 2025