Bansraj Ramharakh Sahu ... vs Parvatibai Dagdoo Gaikar ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7573 Bom

                                         1             37 cra 561-22 with ia 20375-22-c.doc


                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.561 OF 2022
                                         WITH
                        INTERIM APPLICATION NO.20375 OF 2022
                                           IN
                       CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.561 OF 2022

 Bansraj Ramharakh Sahu (Since Deceased)
 Through his legal heirs and ors.          ... Applicants
       Vs.
 Parvatibai Dagdoo Gaikar (Since Deceased)
 Through his legal heirs and ors.          ... Respondents
                                  -------

 Mr.Akshay Pawar with Mr.Kunal Bhanage i/by Mr.Vasim Siddiqui,
 Advocates for the Applicants.
 Mr.Ajit Shobhawat, Advocate for the Respondents No.2(a) to 2(d).

                                             -------

                            CORAM :    ABHAY AHUJA, J.

                            DATE :     31 JULY, 2023.


 P.C. :


 INTERIM APPLICATION NO.20375 OF 2022

1. This is an application for seeking condonation of delay of 78 days

in preferring the challenge to the order dated 5th May, 2022 passed by

the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court, Mumbai dismissing the

Applicants' Appeal No.173 of 2015 and confirming the judgment and

Priya R. Soparkar 1 of 3

2 37 cra 561-22 with ia 20375-22-c.doc

decree dated 27th February, 2015 passed in R.A.E. and R. Suit No.544 of

1998 dismissing the said suit filed for evicting the tenant.

2. Mr.Ajit Shobhawat, learned counsel for the Respondents/Tenants

would submit that the Revision Applicants have failed to mention the

date when they applied for the certified copy and as such have been

negligent in drafting the said application and submits that costs be

imposed if the application is to be allowed. Mr.Akshay Pawar, learned

counsel for the original Applicants would submit that although no date is

mentioned as to when the application was made for the certified copy the

delay has been sufficiently explained in paragraphs No.2 to 14 of the

application. Learned counsel would submit that it is due to Advocate's

delay that this delay in filing the revision application has occurred and for

the same the Revision Applicant cannot be made to suffer.

3. Having heard the learned counsel and having perused the

application, this court is of the view that sufficient cause has been made

out for condoning the delay of 78 days.

4. Let the delay be condoned subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- to

Priya R. Soparkar 2 of 3

3 37 cra 561-22 with ia 20375-22-c.doc

the Kirtikar Law Library within a period of two weeks.

5. The application accordingly stands disposed.

CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.561 OF 2022

6. List the revision application for admission on 6th September, 2023.

7. Both the learned counsel for the parties are of the view that the

matter can be amicably settled.

8. Let the learned counsel pursue the settlement.

                                                   (ABHAY AHUJA, J.)




  Priya R. Soparkar                                                                    3 of 3