Punjab National Bank v. The Board Of Trustees Of Port Of Mumbai And ORS.

1 24-CAF 4043-16 in FAST 18249-16.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4043 OF 2016 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.18249 OF 2016 Punjab National Bank ... Applicant Vs.

The Board of Trustees of the Port of Mumbai & Ors.

... Respondents ----- Ms. Rajlaxmi Punjabi i/by Mable & Associates for applicant. Mr. Siddharth Chhabriya, counsel a/w Ms. Arundhati Korale i/by Motiwalla & Co. for respondents.

----- CORAM: ABHAY AHUJA J.

DATE : 18TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 P.C.:

1.

Heard. Learned counsel for applicant submits that there is a delay of 184 days in preferring the appeal against the judgment and award dated 30th November, 2015 passed by the City Civil Court at Mumbai in S.C. Suit No.3220 of 2010.

2.

Learned counsel draws the attention of this court to paragraph 2 of the application to explain suffcient cause. She submits that although the judgment was passed on 30th November, 2015, the then advocate for applicant, viz., original defendant No.2 MUGDHA M PARANJAPE MUGDHA M PARANJAPE Date: 2021.09.21 12:21:20 +0530

2 24-CAF 4043-16 in FAST 18249-16.odt had returned the brief around February, 2016 as he had left his practice and migrated to South. She submits that thereafter applicant lost track of the matter as there were several other matters to be handled and thereafter the applicant's offcer after taking legal advice and the necessary approvals took time in fling of the appeal belatedly by 184 days.

3.

Respondent No.1 has fled an affdavit in reply opposing the said application. He submits that the delay in fling the appeal cannot be condoned as the respondent No.1 acquired a vested right due to the delay. He draws the attention of this Court to paragraphs 1, 4(b), 4(c), 4(d) and 4(e) of his reply in support of his case. 4.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and also with their able assistance perused the application as well as the reply. 5.

It is observed from the application that the judgment and order was passed on 30th November, 2015 and it is only in the middle of February, 2016 that the earlier advocate returned the briefs as he had left his practice and thereafter the applicant Bank lost its track and subsequently pursuant to legal advice, the appeal

3 24-CAF 4043-16 in FAST 18249-16.odt came to be fled.

6.

It is settled law that delay caused on account of the act or omission of counsel should not affect the rights of the parties. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the view that there is suffcient cause in condoning the delay of 184 days. The delay is accordingly condoned.

7.

Civil Application accordingly stands disposed of. 8.

List the appeal as well as the application for stay for hearing on 20/10/2021.

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)