State Of Gujarat vs Pandar Ranjan Ben Ramji Bhai
2024 Latest Caselaw 405 Guj

Gujarat High Court

State Of Gujarat vs Pandar Ranjan Ben Ramji Bhai on 16 January, 2024

Author: N.V.Anjaria

Bench: N.V.Anjaria

                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




     C/CA/1317/2023                               ORDER DATED: 16/01/2024

                                                                                  undefined




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1317 of
                            2023

            In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 27111 of 2023

==========================================================
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
                                 Versus
                      PANDAR RANJAN BEN RAMJI BHAI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS SHRUTI DHRUVE, AGP for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR ADITYA M KHANDELWAL(12130) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS SANDHYA D NATANI(3678) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
       and
       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

                             Date : 16/01/2024

                        ORAL ORDER

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

Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader

Ms.Shruti Dhruve for the applicant - State and Mr. Aditya

M. Khandelwal for the respondent.

2. It is to condone the delay of 328 days which has

taken place in preferring the Letters Patent Appeal, that the

present application is filed by the State.

3. The passage of time leading to delay is explained

in the averments made in the application by stating that

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/1317/2023 ORDER DATED: 16/01/2024

undefined

after deliverance of the judgment and order of the learned

Single Judge, legal opinion was sought for, and that the files

travelled from one department to another in the hierarchy for

decision making process. Since the applicants are the State,

consumption of time to an extent is inherent before final

decision could be reached. The reasons supplied are

administrative in nature.

4. The sufficient cause is made out to condone the

delay of 328 days. Delay is condoned.

5. Application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J)

(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) M.H. DAVE