Ashok Wamanrao Upalekar vs Solapur Muncipal Corporation
2021 Latest Caselaw 1959 Bom

                                                     7-iast-92835-20 in sast-92826-20


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                   INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO. 92835 OF 2020
                                      IN
                      SECOND APPEAL (ST) NO. 92826 OF 2020

 Ashok Wamanrao Upalekar                                ..Applicant
      Vs.
 Solapur Municipal Corporation                          ..Respondent

                                      ----

 Mr. Prasad P. Kulkarni, for the Applicant.
 Mr. Anand Kulkarni, for the Respondent.

                                      ----

                                     CORAM : C.V. BHADANG, J.

DATE : 29th JANUARY 2021

P.C.

. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the

second appeal. The applicant seeks to challenge the judgment and

decree passed by the First Appellate Court on 8/8/2019. The

certified copy was applied for on 17/12/2019 and the same was

delivered on 23/12/2019. The appeal alongwith the present

application came to be filed on 3/10/2020. According to the

applicant, the delay if counted upto the third week of March 2020

(when the lock-down was declared on account of the pandemic)

would be 136 days.

Mamta Kale page 1 of 3

7-iast-92835-20 in sast-92826-20

2. The learned counsel for the respondent / Corporation points

out that the delay till filing of the application works out to 305 days.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the

learned counsel for the respondent. Perused record.

4. The learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that the

applicant had gone abroad to Australia and had returned only in the

month of March 2020, in support of which he has produced the

copies of air tickets. It is submitted that there were general orders

about the non-lapsing of the period of limitation after March 2020.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent points out that the

applicant has not shown sufficient cause for not filing the appeal

within time.

6. On careful consideration of the rival circumstances and the

submissions made and particularly having regard to the fact that on

and from the third week of March 2020, the physical court working

was suspended on account of the pandemic and there were general

orders regarding non-lapsing of the period of limitation and further

having regard to the fact that the applicant was traveling abroad,

Mamta Kale page 2 of 3

7-iast-92835-20 in sast-92826-20

the applicant has made out sufficient cause for not filing the appeal

within time. In the result, the delay is hereby condoned. The civil

application is accordingly allowed. Let the second appeal be

registered subject to removal of office objections, if any.

C.V. BHADANG, J.

      Mamta Kale                                                     page 3 of 3