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 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Rijavana Parvin W/O Saiyyad Taher vs Khutejabi W/O Saiyyad Husenoddin on 5 August, 2019

Author: V. M. Deshpande

Bench: V.M. Deshpande

                                          1                                    050819cas587.19.odt


                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            : NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

                       CIVIL APPLICATION (CAS) NO. 587 OF 2019
                                         IN
                         SECOND APPEAL ST. NO. 8204 OF 2019
                              RIJAVANA PARVIN W/o SAIYYAD TAHER
                                           VERSUS
                             KHJUNTEJABI W/o SAIYYAD HUSENODDIN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of                             Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Mr. Mohd. Ateeque, Advocate for the applicant.
                          Mr. A. M. Kukday, Advocate for the non-applicant.

                                  CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE, J.

DATE : AUGUST 05, 2019.

This is an application for condonation of delay. Heard Mr. Mohd. Ateeque, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. A. M. Kukday, the learned counsel for the non-applicant.

Perused the application as well as the reply filed on behalf of the non-applicant.

This application was required to be filed because there is a delay of 108 days in filing the second appeal. According to the applicant, she was appearing in-person before the Court below. Though, he appeared in the Court of the learned Judge of the Appellate Court, she did not engage services of any lawyer and ultimately, the appeal was proceeded ex-parte. According to the applicant, in the month of March, she received notices of execution proceedings filed on behalf of the non-applicant and therefore, she applied for obtaining the certified copy ::: Uploaded on - 05/08/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2019 03:03:45 ::: 2 050819cas587.19.odt of the judgment and order passed by the learned Judge of the Appellate Court. The certified copy was applied on 29.3.2019. It was received by him on 01.4.2019 and the second appeal along with the delay application is filed on 04.4.2019.

The non-applicant is the original plaintiff, who is the mother of the present applicant, who received the house property in question under Hiba (oral gift). She preferred a suit for ejectment against the applicant. The suit was dismissed and in the Appellate Court, decree of possession is granted. It is revealed to this Court during the course of the submissions by both the learned counsel that the present non-applicant is residing adjacent to the suit house.

After hearing both the learned counsel, I am of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for condonation of delay.

Hence, the application is allowed, subject to the applicant paying costs of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two thousand five hundred only) to the non-applicant.

The learned counsel for the non-applicant is permitted to accept the costs of Rs.2,500/- for and on behalf of the non-applicant. The costs are to be paid within a period of one week from today.

If the costs are paid within one week and an acknowledgment in that behalf is placed on record, the office is directed to register the appeal.

::: Uploaded on - 05/08/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2019 03:03:45 :::

3 050819cas587.19.odt With this, the application is allowed and disposed of.

Civil Application (CAS) No. 588 of 2019 This is an applicaton for stay.

Heard Mr. Mohd. Ateeque, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. A. M. Kukday, the learned counsel for the non-applicant.

Mr. Kukday, the learned counsel waives notice of this application on behalf of the non-applicant.

The second appeal was barred by limitation. The applicant, therefore, filed an application for condonation of delay bearing CAS No. 587/2019. The said application is allowed today.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the execution proceedings are fixed for tomorrow. The decree is for possession. Admittedly, the applicant is residing in the suit premises.

In that view of the matter, put up this application along with the second appeal for admission after two weeks.

In the meanwhile, there shall be stay to the possession of the applicant.

JUDGE Diwale ::: Uploaded on - 05/08/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2019 03:03:45 :::