SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Bom) 1300

A.M.KHANWILKAR
Chandrakant Govind Sutar – Appellant
Versus
M. K. Associates & another – Respondent


JUDGMENT - KHANWILKAR A.M., J.:---This civil revision application under section 115 of the C.P.C. takes exception to the order passed by the District Judge, Raigad dated 29th July, 1998 in Civil Misc. Application No. 114 of 1997. The said Misc. Application was filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The District Court rejected that application on the ground that no sufficient cause was made out by the petitioner. That decision is the subject matter of challenge in the present revision application.

2. This revision application was heard on 3rd December, 2002, when I was persuaded to take a view that it is maintainable, amended provisions of C.P.C. notwithstanding. However, after that view was pronounced in open Court, immediately thereafter Mr. Oka, learned Counsel for the petitioner, mentioned the matter and in his usual fairness brought to my notice that certain decisions relevant on the issue of maintainability of the revision have not been placed before the Court. He, therefore, requested me not to sign the judgment pronounced in the Court and instead to keep the matters for rehearing on some other day on the question of maintainability of the revision application.













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top