Munish Bachchalal Gupta And Another. v. Laxmi Gupta And Another.

pvr 1 5cam247-11.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Application NO.247 OF 2011 IN Family Court Appeal (ST) NO. 31394 OF 2010 1.MUNISH BACHCHALAL GUPTA AND ANOTHER. ...Applicants

Versus

1.LAXMI GUPTA AND ANOTHER.

...Respondents

None for the Applicants.

Ms.Bhavika Kuperkar i/b. Mr.A.V.Chatuphale, for Respondent No.1 ----- CORAM : A.S.OKA & G.S.KULKARNI, JJ.

DATED : 16th MARCH,2016.

---- P.C.:- 1.

None appears for the Applicants. The learned Counsel appearing for the first Respondent is present. The Applicants are not parties to the proceedings in the Family Court in which the impugned judgment and decree is passed. In paragraph 4 of the application, the Applicants have set out reasons for the delay. They have stated that they were not aware of the impugned judgment and decree. 2.

Considering the nature of the impugned judgment and

pvr 2 5cam247-11.doc decree, a justice oriented and liberal approach will have to be adopted for condoning long delay. Accordingly, sufficient cause is made out. The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). (G.S.KULKARNI, J.) (A.S.OKA, J.)