Gujarat High Court
Kalpesh Gajendrabhai Mehta vs Regional Manager, Bank Of Baroda on 17 July, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3675/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3675 of
2025
In
F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 21232 of 2025
==========================================================
KALPESH GAJENDRABHAI MEHTA
Versus
REGIONAL MANAGER, BANK OF BARODA
==========================================================
Appearance:
JEET Y RAJYAGURU(8039) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR DARSHAN M PARIKH(572) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
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 84
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.2 to 4 of the
application which reads thus:
"2. The applicant submits that the impugned oral judgment is
pronounced on 11.03.2025 and the applicant was thus required to
file the appeal within 30 days from the date of order. Thus, there is
delay of few days in filing the appeal.
3. The applicant submits that the delay has occurred because of the
following reasons:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3675/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025
undefined
(a) After passing the impugned order, the applicant consulted his
lawyer who had appeared before the Special Civil Application,
regarding further course of action;
(b) Thereafter, the Applicant came in contact with the present
Lawyer and the present Lawyer asked the Applicant to bring the
original papers of the reference case filed before the Industrial
Tribunal, Ahmedabad.
(c) After arranging the necessary papers, the advocate for the
applicant opined to file LPA before this Hon'ble Court;
(e) Finally, after receiving all material instructions, the present
LPA is moved before this Hon'ble Court. In the entire process,
some time has been consumed.
(f) The applicant is not aware of provisions of law, more
particularly, law of limitation;
4. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is clear that
the delay which has occurred in preferring the LPA by the present
applicant is not willful or deliberate. But the same has occurred
because of unavoidable circumstances and circumstances beyond
the control of the applicant, applicant...."
3. Learned Advocate Mr.Parikh 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.
4. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3675/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025
undefined
parties and considering the reasons as mentioned in the afore-mentioned
paragraph, delay of 84 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
