Oomen Michael And ORS v. Prabhakar Menka Shetty And ORS.

1/1 2.caost.22287-17.doc [Oommen v Prabhakar]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION [ST.] NO.22287 OF 2017 IN REVIEW PETITION [ST.] NO.22285 OF 2017 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders.

Mr.Kishor V. Tembe, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar, Advocate for respondent No.1. CORAM : R. G. KETKAR, J.

DATE : 08/09/2017 P.C.:

1.

Heard Mr.Kishor Tembe, learned Counsel for the applicants and Mr.Mayur Khandeparkar, learned Counsel for respondent No.1, at length.

2.

Mr. Tembe states that respondent No.2 is a formal party. In view thereof, notice on respondent No.2 is dispensed with.

3.

By this application, the applicants have prayed for condoning the delay of 43 days in filing Review Petition. 4.

For the reasons set out in the application, I am satisfied that the applicants have made out a sufficient cause for condoning delay. Hence, Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs. Order accordingly.

(R. G. KETKAR, J.) Deshmane(PS)