Karl Marx General Labour ... vs Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation on 8 October, 2014

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Gujarat High Court

Karl Marx General Labour ... vs Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation on 8 October, 2014

Author: Jayant Patel

Bench: Jayant Patel, Vipul M Pancholi

          C/CA/12240/2013                                ORDER



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

    CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 12240 of
                                  2013
                              In
     LETTERS PATENT APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) NO. 1639 of 2013
                                    In
           SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5799 of 2011
===========================================================
=====
    KARL MARX GENERAL LABOUR UNION(AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL
                    CORPORATI....Applicant(s)
                            Versus
       AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
PARTY-IN-PERSON, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HS MUNSHAW, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
         CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
                and
                HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M PANCHOLI

                            Date : 08/10/2014


                             ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL) 1 The present application is filed for condonation of delay of 392 days in preferring appeal against the order dated 29.06.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.5799 of 2011. 2 We have heard partyinperson and Ms. Patel, learned advocate for Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate for the respondentCorporation. Page 1 of 3 C/CA/12240/2013 ORDER 3 As such, the ground contended in the application is that the applicant is a poor lady and she has no sufficient means to engage the advocate for prosecuting her matter further. It is also submitted that papers of the case are not readily available, and therefore, time was consumed in filing Letters Patent Appeal. Considering the facts and circumstances, we find that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both the sides in the main Letters Patent Appeal, lenient view can be taken, but at the same time, the applicant should compensate the respondent for delay caused in preferring appeal and appropriate cost of compensation shall be Rs.5,000/. 4 Under the circumstances, delay is condoned on condition that the applicant pays the cost of Rs.5,000/ (Rupees five thousand only) to the respondent within two weeks from today. The applicant shall be at liberty to pay the cost by Demand Draft or Bank Pay Order in the name of the Commissioner of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. After the amount is paid and proof is produced before this Court, Office shall list Letters Patent Appeal for hearing.

5 The present application is disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

(JAYANT PATEL, J.) Page 2 of 3 C/CA/12240/2013 ORDER (V.M.PANCHOLI, J.) chandresh Page 3 of 3

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court