The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Bombay And ANR. v. The Indian Hotels Co.Ltd.,Mumbai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.791 OF 2022 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.890 OF 2007 The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr.
...Applicants
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr.
...Appellant Vs The Indian Hotels Co. Ltd.
... Respondents ...
Mr. Santosh Parad for Applicant/Appellant-MCGM. Mr. Karl Tamboly with Mks. Shahean Moghul with Mr. Shah i/by Mulla & Mulla and CBC for Respondents.
CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.
DATE : FEBRUARY 21, 2022.
P.C. :
Heard.
th November, 2005 passed By judgment and order dated 17 in Municipal Appeal No.2 of 2003, First Appeal preferred by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, was admitted by this Shivgan 1/3
th March, 2007 and appellants were directed to file private Court on 8 paper-book, along with Decree Form within a period of one year. Private paper-book was not filed, which resulted into dismissal of the appeal. Whereafter, Civil Application No.917 of 2009 was moved seeking restoration of the appeal with the prayer to condone the th delay occurred in preferring application. Vide order dated 24 February, 2009, application was allowed and the appeal was restored to file subject to cost of Rs.1,000/-, with a rider that appellants shall file paper-book within a period of two weeks. After restoration, th July, 2014. Time appeal was listed before Registrar (Judl.) on 17 was sought for payment of bhatta charges and was extended from time to time, at the behest of appellants. Finally for non-payment of Bhatta charges on, 20th April, 2015, appeal was dismissed. Thus, Appeal stood dismissed for ;
(i) Non filing of private paper-book as directed by this th February, 2009 in Civil Application No.917 of Court on 24 2009 and (ii) Non-payment of bhatta charges.
Shivgan 2/3
The Corporation moved this Civil Application nearly after 5 years and 6 months and sought condonation of delay. I have perused the application. It is drafted in the most casual manner. It does not narrate the fact that once, the appeal was dismissed and th February, 2009. The only statement, application restored on 24 contains, is that, bhatta charges could not be paid through oversight and nothing more. There is no whisper in the application as to whether paper-book is kept ready or not. To put it differently, application does not disclose "Sufficient Cause" for condoning the delay of 5 years plus.
For all that reasons, application is dismissed. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.) Shivgan 3/3