Nadiad Municipality vs Nimishbhai Ghanshyambhai ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4205 Guj

      C/CA/3138/2019                          ORDER DATED: 08/06/2023




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3138 of 2019
           In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 28430 of 2019

==================================================
                        NADIAD MUNICIPALITY
                               Versus
               NIMISHBHAI GHANSHYAMBHAI BHRAMBHATT

==================================================
Appearance:
MR AK CLERK(235) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RASESH H PARIKH(3862) for the Respondent(s) No.
1,10,11,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MR.HEMANG H PARIKH(2628) for the Respondent(s) No.
1,10,11,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
==================================================

  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH SHASTRI
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI

                         Date : 08/06/2023

                           ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH SHASTRI)

[1] By way of present Civil Application, the applicant - original respondent has prayed for condonation of delay of 314 days in filing Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 25.09.2018.

[2] Mr. A. K. Clerk, learned advocate appearing for the applicant has pointed out by way of specific averments that in view of the explanation which is stated in paragraphs 3 and 4 the appeal could not be filed bona fidely within a period of limitation and as such considering the explanation which has been given, the delay may be

C/CA/3138/2019 ORDER DATED: 08/06/2023

condoned in the interest of justice. To substantiate his submission, Mr. Clerk, learned advocate has also pointed out the decision delivered by Hon'ble Apex Court which is in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and another versus Mst. Katiji and others reported in AIR 1987 SC 1353 and has submitted that instead of technicality the appeal may be heard on merits. Further to substantiate the request of condonation, the assertions which are made in the further affidavit dated 21.10.2019 have also been pointed out and thereby submitted that sufficient cause is shown to condone the delay.

[3] As against this, Mr. Hemang H. Parikh, learned advocate appearing for the contesting respondent has submitted a detailed affidavit opposing the request of condonation of delay and has submitted that this is a systematic device of delaying due benefits to be paid to the concerned workmen and as such has submitted that since the explanation is not sufficient enough the delay may not be condoned.

[4] Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the averments made in the Civil Application as well as in the further affidavit, we are of the opinion that the delay is sufficiently explained more particularly we have also considered the proposition of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforementioned decision and in view of this, we are of the clear opinion that the case is made out to condone the delay of 314 days. Accordingly, we deem it proper to allow the application in terms of para 7(a).

       C/CA/3138/2019                             ORDER DATED: 08/06/2023




[5]    At this stage,   Mr. Hemang H. Parikh, learned advocate by

drawing attention to the order passed in Misc. Civil Application No.609 of 2019 dated 28.03.2022 has requested to fix the Letters Patent Appeal for admission hearing. However, we make it clear that he may file appropriate application to that effect.

(ASHUTOSH SHASTRI, J.)

(DIVYESH A. JOSHI, J.) DHARMENDRA KUMAR