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

2006 Supreme(Guj) 284

K.M.MEHTA, AKIL KURESHI
C. S. JARDOSH – Appellant
Versus
SOMABHAI RANCHHODBHAI PATEL, POWER OF ATTORNEY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: JITENDRA MALKAN, M.A.PAREKH, MEHUL S.SHAH, SURESH M.SHAH

K. M. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) CIVIL Application No. 12410 of 2005 has been filed by Union of India and other applicants, original appellants, seeking condonation of delay of 49 days in filing the restoration application being Misc. Civil application Stamp No. 2879 of 2005. The first Appeal came to be dismissed for want of prosecution on 31st August 2005 by a division Bench of this Court (Coram: r. S. Garg and K. M. Mehta, JJ ). At the time of hearing the Civil Application for condonation of delay of which rule has been issued and duly served on the respondents, learned advocate Shri s. M. Shah appearing for the respondents with learned advocate Shri M. A. Parekh submitted that both the applications, i. e. Civil Application lor condonation of delay as well as the Misc. Civil Application for restoration of the First Appeal be heard together. He submitted that since the grounds available to the respondents to oppose condonation of delay and restoration of appeal are common, both the applications be heard simultaneously. At his request, therefore, Civil Application for condonation of delay as well as Misc. Civil application for restoration were heard together. "to complete the formalities, the







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