Mukesh S/O Pundalik Tekade v. Sau. Pratibha W/O Mukesh Tekade And Others

934 caa 40-2021.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAA) NO. 40/2021 IN APPEAL AGAINST ORDER STAMP NO. 6894/2021 Mukesh S/o Pundalik Tekade Vs.

Sau. Pratibha W/o Mukesh Tekade and others - - - - - - - - - - - - --------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------ - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - ------------- - - - - - Shri N.R. Kanungo, Advocate for appellant Shri Y.N. Thengre, Advocate for respondent No.2 CORAM : SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.

DATE : 17/10/2023 Heard learned Counsel for the applicant.

2.

Present application is filed for condonation of delay in filing Appeal Against Order. It appears that order came to be passed in Spl.C.S. No. 472/2020, on 01/02/2021. The Counsel for applicant applied for certified copy on 22/02/2021, which was ready and Jayashree..

934 caa 40-2021.odt delivered on 19/04/2021. Thereafter, he was suffering from Corona. Courts were also not working regularly. As such, delay of 110 days caused in filing appeal against order.

3.

The learned Counsel for respondent vehemently opposed the application. However, for the reasons put forth in the application, I am satisfied that there is no intentional or deliberate delay. As such, application is allowed.

4.

Delay in filing Appeal Against Order, is hereby condoned.

5.

Registry is directed to register Appeal Against Order.

6.

At this juncture, learned Counsel for respondent raised objection that Appeal Against Order is not maintainable. This issue is kept open at the time of admission.

(SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) Jayashree..