Tuesday, 02, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Savitaben Ramanbhai Ganvit vs Mohammad Hanif Abdul Karim Shaikh
2025 Latest Caselaw 860 Guj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 860 Guj
Judgement Date : 14 July, 2025

Gujarat High Court

Savitaben Ramanbhai Ganvit vs Mohammad Hanif Abdul Karim Shaikh on 14 July, 2025

                                                                                                               NEUTRAL CITATION




                             C/CA/6144/2024                                    ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025

                                                                                                                undefined




                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                           R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 6144 of
                                                      2024

                                              In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 35376 of 2024

                      ==========================================================
                                         SAVITABEN RAMANBHAI GANVIT & ORS.
                                                      Versus
                                      MOHAMMAD HANIF ABDUL KARIM SHAIKH & ANR.
                      ==========================================================
                      Appearance:
                      NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
                      MR TANMAY B KARIA(6833) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
                      RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                      ==========================================================

                           CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE

                                                          Date : 14/07/2025

                                                             ORAL ORDER

1. Heard Mr. Nishit Bhalodi, learned advocate on record for the

applicants-original claimants.

2. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, rule is duly served

upon the respondents. Learned advocate Mr. Tanmay Karia has

appeared on behalf of respondent no.2-S.T. Corporation.

3. The present application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation

Act, 1963, read with Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,

praying for condonation of delay of 986 days caused in preferring the

appeal.








                                                                                                                NEUTRAL CITATION




                             C/CA/6144/2024                                    ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025

                                                                                                                undefined




4. Learned advocate for the applicants has referred to the

averments made in the application, and has submitted that though the

impugned judgment and award was pronounced on 01.01.2022, the

certified copy of the same was applied on 18.04.2024, which was

received by the applicant on 01.05.2024. Learned advocate has

submitted that initially the award amount was accepted, however,

after seeking legal advise, noticing the identical case being decided on

higher side, the applicants had approached the advocate practicing in

the High Court for availing appropriate remedy available in law. It is

further submitted that the applicants have handed over the

Vakalatnama on 30.03.2024. The further time was consumed in

making arrangement for the legal expenses to be incurred, which was

handed over on 12.04.2024 and ultimately the copy of the judgment

was forwarded to the advocate practicing in the High Court on

03.05.2024. By referring to the aforesaid events, learned advocate has

submitted that the appeal was submitted before the Registry on

12.12.2024. Learned advocate has, therefore, urged this Court to take

liberal approach as the applicants are the claimants who intend to

present their case for enhancement. According to him, the claimants

are able to establish their case for just and fair compensation, they

may not be ousted on the technical ground of delay.








                                                                                                                NEUTRAL CITATION




                             C/CA/6144/2024                                    ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025

                                                                                                                undefined




5. Learned advocate Mr. Tanmay Karia has appeared for

respondent no.2-S.T. Corporation has vehemently objected to the

aforesaid prayers by submitting that there is huge delay in approach in

appeal before this Court. He has further submitted that considering

the explanation offered, there is no explanation worth with regard to

the period between May-2024 to December-2024, which substantially

contributes to condonation of delay. He has, therefore, urged this

Court to dismiss the present application. Alternatively, he has urged

this Court to issue appropriate directions to waive the interest for the

interregnum period of delay and to award costs.

6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties

and having considered the aforesaid submissions of learned

advocates, in light of the averments made in the application, as rightly

pointed out by learned advocate for the respondent, the affidavit

lacks the explanation of the period between May-2024 to December-

2024, as is evident from the record. However, noticing the benevolent

legislation, in order to meet with the object of enactment to provide

just and fair compensation, this Court is inclined to accept the prayer

of condonation of delay of 986 days caused in preferring the appeal.

However, at the same time, in order to balance the interest of the

respondents as well, the present application is allowed on condition

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/6144/2024 ORDER DATED: 14/07/2025

undefined

that the claimants shall not be entitled to seek interest for the

interregnum period of delay caused in preferring the appeal.

7. The present application is allowed, subject to cost of Rs.5,000/-,

to be deposited with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority within

a period of two weeks from today.

8. With these observations, present Civil Application is allowed,

and stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

9. Registry is directed to reflect the name of learned advocate Mr.

Tanmay Karia for the respondent no.2-S.T. Corporation in the main

appeal.

(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) SUYASH SRIVASTAVA

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter