Gujarat High Court
Jayprakash Jayantilal Dalal vs Dena Bank (Now Amalgamated With Bank Of ... on 17 July, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3677/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3677 of
2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 20486 of 2025
==========================================================
JAYPRAKASH JAYANTILAL DALAL
Versus
DENA BANK (NOW AMALGAMATED WITH BANK OF BARODA) & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
ORTIS LAW OFFICES(12342) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Date : 17/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 97
days in filing the captioned appeal.
2. Learned Advocate for the applicant in support of his submissions
has invited the attention of this Court to paragraph Nos.4 to 6 and 8 of the
application which reads thus:
"4. After pronouncement of the impugned judgment on 20.02.2025,
the Applicant an aged retired employee residing in Bhavnagar
under the bona fide belief that his case might still be considered for
retiral benefits administratively by the Respondent Bank, especially
in light of the contradictory communications dated 13.04.2009 and
27.05.2009 issued by the Bank, inviting him to submit pension and
terminal benefit claims.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3677/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025
undefined
5. The Applicant, being an elderly person not well-versed with
legal intricacies, required time to collect certified copies, collate
documentary records, and consult advocates in Ahmedabad, which
took considerable time and coordination due to geographical and
logistical limitations.
6. Further, in the intervening period, the Applicant made earnest
efforts to pursue internal representations and inquiries regarding
the pension scheme and eligibility under the Dena Bank
(Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995, and the Bipartite
Settlement dated 11.11.2020, thereby exhausting possible
administrative remedies before approaching this Hon'ble Court.
xxx xxx xxx
8. That in addition to the above, the Applicant was, during the
intervening period after the pronouncement of the impugned
judgment, unfortunately diagnosed with a serious medical ailment
which required immediate and aggressive medical intervention
including hospitalization and surgery. The Applicant was
compelled to undergo a series of diagnostic procedures, surgical
treatment, and post-operative care, which not only consumed
significant time but also debilitated him physically and
emotionally, rendering him incapable of immediately initiating
appellate proceedings....."
3. Learned Advocate Mr.Patel for the respondent has submitted that
in fact the delay is not properly explained by the applicant and therefore
this Court may not condone the delay.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3677/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025
undefined
4. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective
parties and considering the reasons as mentioned in the afore-mentioned
paragraph, delay of 97 days caused in preferring the appeal is condoned.
Registry to list the captioned appeal in seriatim.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
(R. T. VACHHANI, J)
sompura
