M/S Vidhyaram Steel Re-Rolling ... vs Paschim Gujarat Vij Company ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2083 Guj

        C/FA/17041/2018                                         IA ORDER



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2 of 2019
                               IN
   MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR RESTORATION) NO. 1 of 2019
               In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 17041 of 2018
================================================================

M/S VIDHYARAM STEEL RE-ROLLING MILL Versus PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITED ================================================================ Appearance:

MR BM MANGUKIYA for the PETITIONER(s) No. MR DIPAK R DAVE for the RESPONDENT(s) No. ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Date : 11/02/2021 IA ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)

RULE. Learned advocate Mr.Dipak Dave appears and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the opponent­PGVCL.

1. The present application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 374 days caused in filing the accompanying Misc. Civil Application for restoration of the main matter - First Appeal (stamp) No.17041 of 2018.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant, while explaining the delay has submitted that the captioned First Appeal was filed on 10.05.2018 challenging the common judgment and decree dated dated 05.02.2018 passed by 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bhavnagar in Special Civil Case

C/FA/17041/2018 IA ORDER

No.164 of 1999 and Special Civil Case No.136 of 2001. It is submitted that on 15.06.2018 this court passed an order of dismissal of the accompanying first appeal on the ground that the office objections were not removed. Learned advocate has submitted that the applicant could not remove the office objections regarding the stamp fees and, therefore, the matter was ordered to be dismissed for default.

2.1 Learned advocate for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant had prepared memo of the restoration application and hand it over to his clerk for filing it before this court. However, it is submitted that the concerned clerk misplaced the memo and could not file it on time and again the learned advocate prepared the memo of the restoration application and, therefore, it could not file within time, which has caused delay in filing the restoration application. Lastly, it is urged that the delay was not willful or there was no negligence on the part of the applicant nor the learned advocate for the applicant, however, on account of the inadvertent mistake of the clerk of the learned advocate, the applicant may not make to suffer and, therefore, it is prayed that the delay may be condoned in the interest of justice.

3. Learned advocate Mr.Dipak Dave appearing on behalf of the opponent­PGVCL has submitted that

C/FA/17041/2018 IA ORDER

the delay may not be condoned and the application may be rejected.

4. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocates for the respective parties as well as the averments made in the application, it is noticed that the delay of 374 days has occurred due to mistake on the part of the concerned clerk of the learned advocate. We are of the considered opinion that, in the larger interest of justice, some latitude is required to be shown in favour of the applicant. Since we find that due to mistake on the part of the clerk of the learned advocate, the applicant should not be made to suffer, the delay is condoned on the condition that the applicant shall pay a cost of Rs.1,500/­ to the Advocates Law Library.

5. Accordingly, the delay of 374 days is hereby condoned. The present application stands allowed to the aforesaid extent. RULE is made absolute.

Sd/­ (N.V.ANJARIA,J)

Sd/­ (A.S.SUPEHIA,J) Bhavesh-[pps]*