Order 1

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: 1 Delay appln.140.18
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
Delay Application no.140 of 2018
In
Misc.Civil Appeal Stamp No.5999 of 2018
Janak Mulraj Tanna ..Appellant
V/s.
The Board of Trustees of Port
of Mumbai & Ors. ..Respondents
Coram : H.H.THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE
V.G. BISHT
Dated : 3rd October,2019
(C.R.No.19)
Advocate Mr.Vishal Thaker a/w. Advocate Ms.Anjali Trivedi/b. V. Thakers
for applicant.
Advocate Ms.Viveka Truman i/b. The Law Point for respondent nos.1 and 2.
Respondent nos.3 and 4 absent.
O R A L O R D E R
Read application. Read say (Exh.3) of respondent no.1.
2 It appears that exparte order came to be passed on 26 th
February,2018 by Estate Office in Case No.EO/E(211) of 2017 in respect of
the schedule premises of which the present applicant claiming to be the
tenant. According to applicant, in the month of March,2018 he came to
know about passing of said exparte order and immediately approached the
concerned authority, tendered/submitted documents and explained the
factual position. However, for one or the other reason, the concerned
authorities kept the matter lingering. Therefore, he decided to take legal
-- 1 of 5 --
2 Delay appln.140.18
advise and approached the advocate on 12th April,2018. As he was not
having all the papers and proceedings filed by respondent no.1 before
respondent no.2, in view of this, there has been 35 days delay in filing the
present appeal which is not deliberate. Hence, this application.
3 Respondent no.1, on the other hand, opposed the application
on the ground that the appellant/applicant was well aware of the
proceedings before the respondent no.2 and did not once approach the
respondent before passing of the order dated 26th February,2018. Thus,
there being no merit in the application, the same is liable to be dismissed.
4 Heard Mr. Vishal Thaker, learned counsel for applicant and
Ms.Viveka Truman, learned counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2. They have
reiterated the contents of their application and reply respectively.
5 I have carefully gone through the exparte order dated 26 th
February,2018. From the title of the proceeding, it appears that the
applicant was not party to the proceedings. However, the applicant is
claiming himself to be the tenant of the schedule premises. Thus, the
valuable rights of the applicant are involved. By not filing the appeal in
time, the applicant could not have gained anything.
6 It is always desirable that the rights of the parties should be
decided on merits by affording equal opportunity to the parties. The rights
of the applicant, if any, in the schedule premises are therefore, need to be
adjudicated in accordance with law and on merits. No harm or prejudice
-- 2 of 5 --
3 Delay appln.140.18
would be caused to the respondents inasmuch as they will also be at liberty
to contest the claim of the applicant.
7 In view of above and in the interest of justice, it is necessary
that the delay of 35 days be condoned. Hence, I pass following order:
O R D E R
Delay Application No.140/18 is allowed.
Appeal be registered and be proceeded in accordance with
law.
03/10/2019 (V. G. BISHT)
Principal Judge,
Gr.Bombay.
Dictated on : 03/10/2019
Transcribed on : 03/10/2019
Signed by HHJ on : 03/10/2019
-- 3 of 5 --
4 Delay appln.140.18
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER
Name of Stenographer: Mrs.Aruna S. Jayade
Upload date and time: 03/10/2019 (5.25 p.m.)
Name of the Judge H.H.THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE
Shri V.G. BISHT(C.R.No.19)
Date of Pronouncement of Order 3rd October,2019
Order signed by P.O. on 3rd October,2019
Order uploaded on 3rd October,2019
-- 4 of 5 --
5 Delay appln.140.18
-- 5 of 5 --