Bombay High CourtCA/6524/2019disposed offdismissed for default

Automobile Engineers And Services Thr Its Proprietor v. Rukhminibai Raju Dhobale And ORS

2020-02-14Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.L. Achliya2 pages

CA 6524/19 in FAST 13804/19 - 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 948 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6524 OF 2019 IN FAST/13804/2019 AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERS AND SERVICES THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR

VERSUS

RUKHMINIBAI RAJU DHOBALE AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Applicants : Shri Amol Gandhi h/f Shri Mehta Punit S. Respondent nos.1 to 4 served.

Advocate for Respondent no.5 : Shri S.S. Bora h/f Shri V.S. Janephalkar Advocate for Respondent no.6 : Shri A.B. Gatne Dismissed against respondent no.7 as per order dated 20/9/2019. CORAM: V.L. ACHLIYA, J.

DATE: 14.02.2020 PER COURT :

1] The applicant - appellant has moved this application seeking condonation of 295 days delay in fling appeal for the reasons set out in detail in the application. 2] Heard learned counsel for the applicant - appellant and respondent nos.5 & 6. The respondent nos.1 to 4 though served are absent.

3] Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the delay caused in fling appeal cannot be termed as intentional and deliberate. It is submitted that the Tribunal proceeded ex-parte against the applicant - appellant. The applicant has no knowledge about the order of pay and recover passed against the applicant - appellant. Only after execution is fled in the matter, the applicant came to know about the order of pay and recover passed in the

CA 6524/19 in FAST 13804/19 - 2 - matter. It is submitted that the applicant has good case to succeed on merits. If delay is not condoned, there is every likelihood that meritorious matter may be rejected for technical reason. 4] Learned counsel for the respondent nos.5 & 6 strongly opposed the application with contention that the reasons assigned cannot be accepted as sufcient cause to condone the delay. It is submitted that the reasons as assigned for condonation of delay are false and concocted. No case is made out to condone the delay. 5] On due consideration of the submissions advanced in the light of unchallenged and uncontroverted pleadings made in the application assigning the cause for condonation of delay, I am of the view that the application deserves to be allowed.

Keeping in mind the broad principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Esha Bhattacharjee V/s Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy and others reported in (2013)12 S.C.C. 649, I am of the view that the delay deserves to be condoned. 6] Accordingly, the application is allowed. Delay condoned. Appeal be registered and placed for admission on 17.3.2020. (V.L. ACHLIYA, J.) ndk/c142204.