Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Abasaheb Bhanudas Thakur vs Govind Rambhau Narwade
2021 Latest Caselaw 14278 Bom

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 14278 Bom
Judgement Date : 1 October, 2021

Bombay High Court
Abasaheb Bhanudas Thakur vs Govind Rambhau Narwade on 1 October, 2021
Bench: V. V. Kankanwadi
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                     917 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1037 OF 2021
                               IN SAST/18424/2020


                            ABASAHEB BHANUDAS THAKUR
                                      VERSUS
                   GOVIND RAMBHAU NARWADE AND OTHERS
                                         ...
                    Mr. R.K. Jadhavar, Advocate for the applicant
            Mr. V.V. Bhavthankar, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3
                                         ...

                                   CORAM :     SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.
                                   DATE :      01st OCTOBER, 2021


PER COURT :



1              Present application has been filed initially for getting delay of

283 days condoned in filing Second Appeal, however, it appears that the

office calculated the delay at 80 days and accordingly the correction has been

made.


2              Present applicant is the original plaintiff, who had filed suit for

redemption of mortgage and possession before Joint Civil Judge Junior

Division, Ambajogai. The said suit came to be dismissed on 07.02.2013. He

preferred Regular Civil Appeal No.27/2013 before learned District Judge-1,



    ::: Uploaded on - 04/10/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2021 17:33:13 :::
                                          2                                     CA_1037_2021



Ambejogai, Dist. Beed. The said appeal has been dismissed on 26.09.2019.

The applicant intends to file Second Appeal, however, there is delay.


3              Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that since the

applicant is aged 70, suffering from diabetes and blood pressure, could not

approach this Court within limitation. He prayed for condonation of delay by

taking liberal view.


4              Reply has been filed by the respondents stating that though the

appeal was decided on 26.09.2019, the present applicant applied for the

certified copies on 22.11.2019 and there is no explanation for the delay

caused in filing application for certified copies. Further, the Second Appeal

ought to have been filed on or before 22.02.2020, however, it has been filed

on 05.10.2020.          Therefore, the delay has not been properly explained.

Learned Advocate for the respondents made submissions in consonance with

the reply.


5              It appears that calculation of period of limitation by this Court is

wrong. It is to be noted that the First Appellate Court decided the matter on

26.09.2019. The period of limitation to file Second Appeal on 90 days would

have started from the next date of the pronouncement of the Judgment in the

said appeal and the period required for obtaining the certified copies would




    ::: Uploaded on - 04/10/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2021 17:33:13 :::
                                         3                                   CA_1037_2021



have been allowed to be exempted. However, in this case, the certified copies

were applied on 22.11.2019 and on the same day those copies were delivered

to the appellant. At the most, the said one day may be exempted. In fact,

there is no explanation for the delay caused from 27.09.2019 to 21.11.2019.

Further, the present appeal could have been filed around 23.02.2020 but it

has been filed on 05.10.2020. It is to be noted that the present applicant

cannot take benefit of the decision by the Hon'ble Apex Court for extension of

period of limitation, as the period of limitation for the applicant to file the

appeal had come to an end before the Lock-down was declared and,

therefore, calculation of delay that appears to have been made earlier i.e. 283

days appears to be correct, but still the reason that has been mentioned by

the applicant is same.


6              The applicant is a 70 years old person, agriculturist and a

pensioner. He had filed suit for redemption of mortgage, that is, claiming the

right in immovable property and, therefore, liberal view is taken taking into

consideration the duration of the delay. The inconvenience that would be

caused to the respondents can be compensated in terms of money. Hence,

following order.


                                     ORDER

1 The application stands allowed.

                                          4                                    CA_1037_2021



2                The delay caused in filing Second Appeal stands condoned,

subject to deposit of costs of Rs.9,000/- (Rupees Nine Thousand only), within

a period of one month from today.

3 After the deposit of the amount, Second Appeal be verified and

registered by the registry and the costs amount be distributed to the

respondents, equally.

( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J. )

agd

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter