Parvati Chandrakant Phalake vs Union Of India And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 30 Bom

                                                                     6-ia-783-22.doc


                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                         INTERIM APPLICATION NO.783 OF 2022
                                         IN
                        REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO.24732 OF 2019
                                         IN
                            WRIT PETITION NO.522 OF 2022

 Parvati Chandrakant Phalke                                ...Applicant/Petitioner
       Versus
 The Union Of India And Ors.                               ...Respondents
                                     ---------
Shri. S.I.Ahmed, for Applicant/Petitioner.
Smt.Neeta V. Masurkar, for Respondents in Review Petition (St.) No.24732 of
2019.
                                     ---------
                                            CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA &
                                                    M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.

DATED : 2nd JANUARY, 2023

P.C. :

1. By this Interim application, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of

16 years 2 months 6 days in filing review petition. During the course of

arguments, learned counsel for the Applicant states that there is a delay of

about 18 years in filing review petition.

2. With the assistance of learned counsel for the parties, we have perused

the averments made in the interim application. The only explanation given in

the interim application for condonation of delay is that, the Applicant is poor

and illiterate and widow of Sepoy Chandrakant Phalke and the Applicant was

granted liberty by this Court to file interim application for condonation of

delay in review petition.

6-ia-783-22.doc

3. Learned counsel for the Applicant relied upon the judgments of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in case Union of India & Ors. Vs. Tarsem Singh in Civil

Appeal Nos.5151-5152 of 2008 and also in case of Union of India & Anr. Vs.

Surender Singh Parmar in Civil Appeal No.9389 of 2014 and vehemently urged

that this Court has ample power to condone delay even for a long period of 20

years.

4. Interim application is vehemently opposed by Mrs.Masurkar, learned

counsel for the Respondents, on the ground that there is a gross unexplained

delay in filing review petition.

5. In our view, Mrs.Masurkar, learned counsel for the Respondents is right

in her submission that delay of 18 years or 16 years is not explained by the

Applicant in the interim application.

6. None of the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the

Applicant are even remotely applicable to the facts of this case. Interim

application for condonation of delay is accordingly dismissed. Consequently,

review petition is filed by the Applicant is also dismissed.

(M.M. SATHAYE, J.)                                             (R.D. DHANUKA, J.)