Gujarat High Court
Veraval Patan Joint Nagarpalika vs Pravinbhai Nathabhai Lukka on 17 February, 2026
Author: Bhargav D. Karia
Bench: Bhargav D. Karia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4544/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/02/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY)
NO. 4544 of 2025
In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL/20765/2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION/1849/2025
=================================================
VERAVAL PATAN JOINT NAGARPALIKA
Versus
PRAVINBHAI NATHABHAI LUKKA & ANR.
=================================================
Appearance:
MR HARIBHAI PATEL for MR DEEPAK P SANCHELA(2696)
for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VAIBHAV A VYAS(2896) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI DHRUVE AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
=================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D.
KARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA
Date : 17/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA)
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Haribhai Patel appearing for learned advocate Mr.Deepak P. Sanchela for the applicant, learned advocate Mr.Vaibhav A. Vyas for the respondent no.1 and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Shruti Dhruve for the respondent no.2.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by DIKSHA HARISH GUSAIN(HC02363) on Fri Feb 20 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Mar 14 02:04:14 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4544/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/02/2026 undefined Mr.Vaibhav A. Vyas waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent no.1 and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Shruti Dhruve waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent no.2.
3. By this application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 52 days caused in filing the captioned Letters Patent Appeal against the order dated 19.03.2025 as well as modified order dated 09.04.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.1849 of 2025.
4. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the applicant and more particularly, considering the averments made in the memorandum of application, the Court is of the view that the delay caused in filing the Letters Patent Appeal has been sufficiently explained.
5. The application, therefore, succeeds and is, accordingly, allowed. The delay caused in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is hereby condoned. Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by DIKSHA HARISH GUSAIN(HC02363) on Fri Feb 20 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Mar 14 02:04:14 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4544/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/02/2026 undefined
6. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs.
(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) (L. S. PIRZADA, J) DIKSHA Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by DIKSHA HARISH GUSAIN(HC02363) on Fri Feb 20 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Mar 14 02:04:14 IST 2026