Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Maggie Widow Of Anthony Mascarenhas And ... vs Roque A. Jacinto on 10 October, 2018

Author: R. G. Ketkar

Bench: Rajesh G. Ketkar

                             1/2                        918.CAC.555-18.doc
                                                                  [Maggie v Roque]


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

               CIVIL APPLICATION NO.555 OF 2018
                              IN
       CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION [ST] NO.24136 OF 2018

Office Notes,  Office   Court's  or Judge's orders.
Memoranda of Coram, 
appearances, Court's 
orders or directions  
and Registrar's orders
                         Mr. V.K. Tripathi,  Advocate for  Applicants.
                         Mr. C.N. Chavan, Advocate for the Respondent.

                          CORAM : R. G. KETKAR, J.
                          DATE     : 10/10/2018
            P.C.:

1. Heard Mr.V.K. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the applicants and Mr.C.N. Chavan, learned Counsel for the respondent.

2. This is an application for condonation of delay of 1189 days caused in filing C.R.A. Mr. Chavan raised preliminary objection on the ground of maintainability of this C.R.A. He invited my attention to the order dated 6.2.2018 passed by this Court (Coram: G.S. Kulkarni, J.) in Writ Petition No.5147/2015. By that order, this Court, after recording that the petition was heard for quite sometime permitted the petitioners to withdraw the Petition with liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum. He submitted that thereafter the petitioners filed Civil Application for setting aside the order dated 6.2.2018. He invited my attention to paragraph-3 of that application. By order dated 2/2 918.CAC.555-18.doc [Maggie v Roque] 14.8.2018, Civil Application was disposed of by observing that no clarification is required as liberty was already granted to the applicants to file appropriate proceedings.

3. Mr. Tripathi submits that there is still confusion as to whether appropriate proceedings are to be filed in this Court or before any other Court. He, therefore, submits that the Registry may be directed to place this proceeding before the same Court which passed the orders dated 6.2.2018 and 14.8.2018.

4. In view thereof, Registry to place the papers and proceedings of this matter before the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice for passing appropriate orders. Liberty to move Registry for that purpose. Order accordingly.


                                                                                              (R. G. KETKAR, J.)



                     Deshmane(PS)



             Digitally signed
             by Pradipkumar
Pradipkumar Prakashrao
Prakashrao  Deshmane
Deshmane    Date:
             2018.10.11
             17:29:04 +0500