Ashitkumar Mahendrabhai Shah vs Rankaben Rajnikant Thakkar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1290 Guj

         C/CA/4757/2019                                     ORDER




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                 R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4757 of 2019

                   In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 31110 of 2019

==========================================================
                   ASHITKUMAR MAHENDRABHAI SHAH
                               Versus
                    RANKABEN RAJNIKANT THAKKAR
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. JAIMIN R DAVE(7022) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS HIRVA R DAVE(10742) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
SHIVAM D PARIKH(9477) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR JF MEHTA(461) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA

                            Date : 28/01/2021

                        ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)

Heard learned advocate Mr. Jaimin Dave for the applicant­ appellant and learned advocate Mr.J.F.Mehta for the respondent.

2. The application is filed seeking condonation of delay which has taken place in preferring the First Appeal against the judgment and award dated 31.7.2019 passed by the Family Court, Surat in execution petition No.10 of 2014 whereby the execution petition filed by the appellant came to be rejected.

3. As per the prayer in the application, delay is of 18 days, however, learned advocate for the respondent pointed out that this appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 and

C/CA/4757/2019 ORDER

that Sub section (3) of the Section 19 of the said Act, period of thirty days is prescribed as limitation to start from the date of judgment or order of the Family Court. Going by said aspect, the delay is worked out to be 98 days, it was submitted.

4. Explaining the delay it is stated by the applicant that after the impugned order came to be passed, applicant sought for legal opinion from the advocate. The advocate advised to prefer the appeal. He thereafter contacted the advocate at Ahmedabad whom the case was assigned in the second week of September, 2019. The appeal was drafted and came to be filed in High Court.

5. Delay of 98 days occurred in preferring the First Appeal could be said to be bonafide as the time was consumed in legal consultation for which the applicant­ appellant was within his right to undergo. Sufficient cause is made out. Delay is condoned. The present application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J)

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) Manshi