Shri. Somnath Tulshiram Galande vs Standard Capacitors Pvt. Ltd. And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9517 Bom

2023:BHC-AS:26549
                                                                                   32-cra-114-2022.doc


                     SA Pathan
                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                  CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.114 OF 2022

                     Somnath Tulshiram Galande                     ... Applicant
                               V/s.
 SHABNOOR
 AYUB
 PATHAN
                     Standard Capacitors Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.          ... Respondents
 Digitally signed
 by SHABNOOR
 AYUB PATHAN
 Date: 2023.09.12
 10:44:00 +0530




                     Mr. Hrishikesh Chavan, for the Applicant.
                     Mr. Sudhir Sadavarte, for the Respondent.



                                                   CORAM    : AMIT BORKAR, J.

                                                   DATED    : SEPTEMBER 11, 2023
                     P.C.:

1. By the impugned order dated 16 January 2019, the Appellate Court has rejected application for condonation of delay of 27 days in filing the appeal.

2. The respondent filed a Special Civil Suit bearing No.696 of 2000 for recovery of amount of Rs.4,35,300/-. By judgment and decree dated 12 September 2006, the suit was partly decreed.

3. The petitioner, therefore, filed an appeal against the said decree along with application for condonation of delay.

4. The Appellate Court rejected the application on the ground that the reasons in the application are not sufficient.

5. Learned Advocate for the respondent vehemently opposed the application contending that the application is casually drafted,

32-cra-114-2022.doc

it cannot be sufficient cause of delay within the meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. He states that the length of delay is not important, but the cause of mentioned in the application is not sufficient, hence prayed for rejection of the application.

6. On perusal of the application, it appears that the appeal was filed by the petitioner in person. The reasons mentioned in the application is due to old age and money problem as well as harassment.

7. Considering the length of delay and the cause stated in the application, in my opinion, the petitioner has made out a case for condonation of delay. Hence, pass following order:

a) The impugned order dated 16 January 2019 passed by the District Judge - 18, Pune, in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.1097 of 2018 is quashed and set aside.

b) The Civil Miscellaneous Application No.1097 of 2018 is allowed.

8. The writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)