Final Order 1

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: Delay Condonation Appln.No.18/19 .. 1 .. Order
CNR No. MHCC010009092019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION NO.18 OF 2019
IN
MISCELLENEOUS APPEAL (ST) NO.9002 OF 2018
Hemangi Madan Madhav )
Age about : 52 years, legal heir of )
Madan Sadashiv Madhav )
Retired Municipal Employee, )
R/at : Room No.23, Block No.F4, )
New Deonar Municipal Colony, Govandi, )
Mumbai – 400 043. )...Applicant/Org. Appellant
V/s.
The Municipal Corporation of Greater )
Mumbai, a body corporate under Mumbai )
Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 having its )
principal office at Mahapalika Marg, )
Mumbai – 400 001. )...Respondent.
Appearances:
Learned Adv. Ms. Kavita Sharma for applicant/Org. Appellant.
Learned Adv. Mr. A.V. Diwate for respondent/MCGM.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE
(C.R.No.04)
DATED : 15th November, 2019.
: ORAL ORDER :
The applicant has preferred this application for condonation of
delay of 6 days in filing the Miscellaneous Appeal Stamp
-- 1 of 3 --
Delay Condonation Appln.No.18/19 .. 2 .. Order
No.9002/2018, challenging the final order dated 31.05.2018 passed by
the respondent. Under the said order, the respondent has directed the
applicant/original appellant to vacate the enquiry premises within one
month from the service of said order.
2. According to the applicant, she is one of 300 members who have
been served by identical orders of respondent. It is further contended by
the applicant that since there was large number of members for
challenging the similar orders, she had to spend substantial time in first
seeking advise and thereafter, acting upon the same. Thus, there
occurred delay of 6 days in presenting the appeal.
3. On the contrary, the advocate for respondent Shri Diwate
strongly opposed the application by filing written say on application for
stay at Exhibit2, on the ground that the applicant was not diligent.
4. Heard rival submissions. Also perused the documents on record.
5. Admittedly, there is delay of 6 days in presenting the aforesaid
appeal against the order of eviction dated 31.05.2018 of the
respondent. However, during the course of argument, the advocate for
respondent clearly submitted that there are number of matters pending
in this Court for challenging the similar orders and all those matters are
kept for hearing jointly. It is to be noted here that earlier Presiding
Officer has already stayed the execution of impugned order during the
pendency of this Delay Application. Under such circumstances, the
delay of only 6 days can be condoned in the interest of justice, so that
this appeal can be heard alongwith other similar matters. Hence, I pass
following order.
-- 2 of 3 --
Delay Condonation Appln.No.18/19 .. 3 .. Order
ORDER
1. The Delay Condonation Application No.18 of 2019 is
hereby allowed and the delay of 6 days in filing
Miscellaneous Appeal Stamp No.9002 of 2018 stands
condoned.
2. Since the application is allowed, the Stay Application at
Exhibit2 also stands disposed of.
3. No order as to cost.
4. The Delay Condonation Application No.18 of 2019 is
disposed of accordingly.
(SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE)
1st Additional Principal Judge,
(C.R.No.4)
Date : 15.11.2019. City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai
Dictated on : 15.11.2019.
Transcribed on : 15.11.2019.
Signed on : 15.11.2019.
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
15.11.2019, at 4.56 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
Tushar P. Kuwar
[NAME OF STENOGRAPER]
Name of the Judge
(With Court room no.)
HHJ Shri S.C. More
Court Room No.4
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/order 15.11.2019
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 15.11.2019
Judgment/order uploaded on 15.11.2019
-- 3 of 3 --