Bombay High Court
Variegate Realestate Pvt. Ltd vs Ecap Equities Limited on 26 October, 2023
Author: Abhay Ahuja
Bench: Abhay Ahuja
2023:BHC-OS:12553
5. IAL 29159-23 in SJL 27065-23 in COMSS 35-23.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 29159 OF 2023
IN
SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT (L) NO. 27065 OF 2023
IN
COMMERCIAL SUMMARY SUIT NO. 35 OF 2023
Variegate Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. ...Applicant/Defendant
V/s.
Ecap Equities Ltd. ...Respondent/Plaintiff
Mr. Aman Kacheri with Ms. Sakshi Dube i/b Agarwal and Dhanuka
Legal for Applicant/Defendant.
Mr. Jehaan Mehta with Ms. Dhrishti Bhindora i/b Manilal Kher Ambalal
& Co. for Respondent/ Plaintiff.
CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE : 26th October, 2023
P.C. :
1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 10 days in filing the reply to the summons for judgment in the above suit.
2. Mr. Kacheri, learned Counsel for the Interim Applicant would submit that the delay is due to inadvertent reasons, that the authorised representative of the applicant was traveling and therefore receiving appropriate instructions and collating the important documents for Nikita Gadgil 1/3
5. IAL 29159-23 in SJL 27065-23 in COMSS 35-23.doc filing the affidavit in reply took some time. Learned Counsel would submit that the delay has not been intentional and the applicant has acted diligently with reasonable speed. That it is only due to unavailablity of the authorised representative that the reply could not be submitted in time. Learned Counsel would submit that the reply is served on 15th October, 2023 upon the learned Advocate for the Plaintiff and e-filed on 16th October, 2023 along with the interim application for condonation of delay.
3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent in the interim application and the plaintiff in the suit, have filed an affidavit in reply raising objections in the matter.
4. Mr. Mehta, learned Counsel for the plaintiff/Respondent in the interim application would submit that in the event this Court is inclined to condone the delay some costs may be imposed.
5. Having heard the learned Counsel and having perused the application as well as reply, this Court is of the view that there is sufficient cause for condoning the delay of 10 days in filing the reply. However, considering that the interim applicant is also a corporate, Nikita Gadgil 2/3
5. IAL 29159-23 in SJL 27065-23 in COMSS 35-23.doc duly advised by professionals, this Court is of the view that the delay be condoned, subject to costs of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand Only) to be paid to the High Court Law Library (Original Side), within a period of two weeks.
6. The application is allowed as above in terms of prayer clause
(a). Let the affidavit in reply be taken on record by the Registry.
7. Application stands disposed of.
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.) Nikita Gadgil 3/3 Signed by: Nikita Gadgil Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 26/10/2023 21:17:23