Chandrakant Krishna Shetty v. The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai And ORS

38.CAO241_2015.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Vidya Amin CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 241 OF 2015 IN REVIEW PETITION (St.) NO. 29158 OF 2015 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1194 OF 2014 Chandrakant Krishna Shetty ... Applicant Vs.

The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.

... Respondents Mr. Nigel Quraishy i/b. Mr. Dushyant Krishnan, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. M.R. Bhoir, Advocate for respondent nos. 1, 2, 4 to 6/BMC. CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

DATE: 1st March, 2016.

P.C.:

None present for respondent no. 3 though served. 2.

This Application is moved for condonation of delay of 90 days in filing Review Petition.

3.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has filed additional affidavit in support of his prayer for condonation of delay. The learned counsel submitted that delay of 90 days is caused because the applicant was suffering from various ailments during that period, i.e. chest pain, cataract, hypertension for a long period and so it was not possible for him to take steps. The applicant has lost the vision of his left eye. In 1 / 2

38.CAO241_2015.doc support of his averments in the affidavit, he has filed medical certificate. 4.

The learned counsel for the respondents/Corporation opposed the application.

5.

In view of the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and considering the medical certificate and the reasons mentioned in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the additional affidavit, sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay. Hence, delay is condoned. Civil Application is allowed.

6.

Review Petition be registered. Place the matter on 29th March, 2016. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) 2 / 2