Gujarat High Court
Ajijunnisha W/O Mohammedaiyub ... vs Khatijabanu Mohammedidarish Ansari ... on 23 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4288/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 4288 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 23109 of 2025
================================================================
AJIJUNNISHA W/O MOHAMMEDAIYUB ABDULRASHID ANSARI-
EXPIRED(LHS OF DECD.MOHAMMEDAIYUB ABDULRASID ANSARI &
ORS.
Versus
KHATIJABANU MOHAMMEDIDARISH ANSARI (MOHAMMEDIDARISH
ABDULRASHID ANSARI SINCE DEAD THRU LHS AND LRS) & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
DEVANGI B SOLANKI(8888) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 23/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. This application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation
Act, seeking condonation of delay of 1224 days caused in filing
the appeal.
2. Heard learned advocate Ms. Devangi B. Solanki for
applicants. Though served, none appeared for respndents.
3. Learned advocate for the applicants has contended that the
suit was filed by the opponents against the father of applicants
for possession of the suit property. Pending the suit, original
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4288/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/09/2025
undefined
defendant-father of present applicants expired and the heirs were
brought on record. However, learned advocate for the applicants
did not inform about the progress of the suit and proceedings
and the matter proceeded ex parte. Resultantly, the evidence of
applicants was closed and the suit came to be decreed.
Thereafter, the application for recall of the judgment and decree
was filed by the present applicants which came to be dismissed
for default on 04.04.2025. On dismissal of the application for
recall, the applicants realized and challenged the impugned
judgment and decree passed in Civil Suit. Resultantly, delay has
occurr. It is contended that there is intentional delay on the part
of the applicants and have good case on law as well as on facts.
It is further submitted that justice orientated view be adopted
and delay may be condoned.
4. Considering the submissions canvased by learned adovcate
for the applicants and the averments made in the application, it
appears that the applicants were brought on record of the Civil
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4288/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/09/2025
undefined
Suit upon death of original defendant No.1 and thereafter, for
one reason or the other, applicants did not remain present and
contest the suit. Resultantly, the suit came be decreed against the
applicants. The application for recall of the impugned judgment
and decree was filed and the same came to be dismissed for
default on 04.04.2025. Thereafter, applicants realized to
challenge the impugned judgment and decree passed in Civil
Suit No.1108 of 2004. It appears from the record that applicants
were not heard by learned Trial Court before passing a decree
against them. Considering the settled proposition of law that
while deciding application for condonation of delay, lenient
view is required to be adopoted by the Courts. However, such
leniency cannot be extended to the applicants without balancing
the equity. Resultantly, the applicattion of condonation of delay
is allowed on a condition to deposit cost of Rs.10,000/- before
the City & District Law Library, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad
within a period of two weeks from the date of this order.
5. Upon depositing the cost of Rs.10,000/- before the City &
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4288/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/09/2025
undefined
District Law Library, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, delay is
condoned.
6. In view of the above observations and directions, the
present application stands disposed of.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
RINKU MALI
