Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And 2 ORS.

Before : Anil H. Laddhad, Prothonotary & Senior Master Date : 07th April, 2025 FOR HEARING AND FINAL DISPOSAL :

CHOL/325/2024 in WPL/29825/2021 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Mr. Yash Vyas, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Milind More, A.G.P for respondent - State. P.C.:

The present Chamber Order is filed by the applicant for setting aside Order dated 06.02.2024, rejecting captioned Petition under O.S.Rule 986 for non-compliance of office objections.

Ld. Advocate for the applicant submits that respondents were served with the Chamber Order as per Affidavit of Service, filed on 31.07.2024.

Heard ld. Advocate for the applicant. Perused Affidavit / Additional Affidavit in Support, contents of which are self-explanatory. It is contended that time and again matter was listed before the Hon'ble Court and ld. Advocate was under bonafide impression that office objections were complied with. It is further contended that the defects regarding illegibility of annexures were not displayed online, however, the applicant was in process of removing office objections, but on account of miscommunication/misunderstanding with Ld. Advocate, office objections could not be complied with within time. It is further contended that since applicant is resident of Delhi, unavoidable delay of 105 days caused in filing present Chamber Order. Ld. Advocate submits that the applicant has a good case on merits and prays for restoration of captioned Petition.

Ld. A.G.P for the State submits for passing suitable orders.

2 Before : Anil H. Laddhad, Prothonotary & Senior Master Date : 07th April, 2025 contd....

CHOL/325/2024 in WPL/29825/2021 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Considering reasons put-forth in Affidavits, appear to be bonafide and substantial justice cannot be denied on technical grounds.

Moreover, no prejudice would cause to the respondents since they can contest the Petition on merits once it is restored to file. However, I am of the view that delay of 105 days caused in filing present Chamber Order, is required to be compensated by saddling reasonable cost.

In view thereof, delay of 105 days caused in filing present Chamber Order is condoned subject to payment of cost of Rs. 2,500/-, to be paid to the High Court Legal Services Authority, Mumbai within two weeks from today. Accordingly, the present Chamber Order is granted as prayed.

Upon payment of cost, the applicant to remove office objections on the Petition and get the same registered and/or numbered within four weeks from the date of uploading of order, failing Petition to stand rejected for noncompliance of office objections under O.S.Rule 986.

Date : 07.04.2025 Prothonotary and Senior Master Digitally signed by RAJEEV VIJAY ACHARYA Date:

2025.04.07 18:51:33 +0530 RAJEEV VIJAY ACHARYA