Bombay High Court
Gopalrao Dayaram Chaudhari And Others vs Smt. Vanita Vinod Chaudhari And Others on 17 January, 2024
Author: G. A. Sanap
Bench: G. A. Sanap
2024:BHC-NAG:688
1 26 cas1220.22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CIVIL APPLICATION (CAS) NO. 1220 OF 2022
IN
SECOND APPEAL ST. NO. 12408 OF 2022
GOPALRAO DAYARAM CHAUDHARI AND OTHERS
VERSUS
SMT. VANITA VINOD CHAUDHARI AND OTHERS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Y. J. Chandurkar, Advocate for the applicants/appellants.
Mrs. Naina Dhoke, Advocate for respondent nos. 4 to 9
CORAM : G. A. SANAP, J.
DATE : JANUARY 17, 2024.
1. Heard learned advocate for the appellants and learned
advocate for respondent nos.4 to 9. Perused the record and
proceedings.
2. This is an application for condonation of 65 days
delay caused in filing Second Appeal against the impugned
judgment and decree dated 20.11.2021 passed by learned
Principal District Judge, Amravati.
3. It is stated that initially the appellants had filed an
application seeking review of the impugned judgment and
decree. The said review application was withdrawn on
12.07.2022. The appellants were advised to challenge the
impugned judgment and decree by filing Second Appeal.
Accordingly, the appellants have filed this appeal on
02.08.2022. It is stated that due to Covid period, the
appellants could not file the appeal. It is submitted that the
2 26 cas1220.22.odt
appellants are entitled to get the delay for the relevant
period, which is covered by the order of Hon'ble Supreme
Court, condoned as of right. It is stated that the appellants
have good case on merits and if the application for
condonation of delay is rejected, then they would be
completely non-suited.
4. Learned advocate for respondent nos.4 to 9 has
opposed the application. It is contended that no case has
been made out to condone the delay.
5. On going through the facts stated in the application, I
am satisfied that a case is made out to condone 65 days
delay caused in filing Second Appeal. It is undisputed that
review application filed by the appellants seeking review of
the impugned judgment and decree, was withdrawn on
12.07.2022.
6. It is to be noted that as of right, the appellants cannot
seek exclusion of the period taken for review application,
however, the facts remains that they were prosecuting the
available remedy and in good faith. While deciding the
application for cononation of delay, the Court has to adopt a
pragmatic approach rather than pedantic approach. The
adjudication of a dispute once and for all on merits is always
in the interest of both the parties. If the parties are non-
suited on some technical issue, the same can lead to another
round of litigation between the parties.
7. In the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that a
case is made out for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the
3 26 cas1220.22.odt
application is allowed.
8. Delay of 65 days caused in filing this appeal is
condoned. The application is disposed of. The appeal be
registered.
Second Appeal St. No. 12408 of 2022
1. Heard learned advocate for the appellants.
2. On registration, issue notice to the respondents,
returnable within four weeks.
3. Mrs. Nayana Dhoke, learned advocate submits that
she has instructions to appear for respondent nos.4 to 9 and
waives service on their behalf.
JUDGE
Diwale
Signed by: DIWALE
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 18/01/2024 15:41:47
