2025:BHC-OS:25215

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 33982 OF 2025

IN

WRIT PETITION NO. 2399 OF 2011

Euro Vistaa (India) Limited .. Applicant.

In the matter between

Euro Vistaa (India) Ltd. .. Petitioner.

v/s.

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.

& Another .. Respondents. Adv. Anand Kumar i/b. Mrs. Davat A. Jehangir, for the Applicant/ Plaintiff.

Digitally signed

by SMITA

SMITA RAJNIKANT Adv. Dikshita Gupte with Deputy Legal Manager Shri Suryakant Adhate, for

RAJNIKANT JOSHI JOSHI Date:

2025.12.18 Respondents.

14:10:13 +0530

CORAM: FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA,J.

DATE : 17^th DECEMBER, 2025.

P. C:-

1 This Interim Application has been filed for condonation of delay of 545 days in filing Interim Application and for restoration of this Writ Petition. The Order also seeks setting aside of the Order of dismissal

dated 24^th April, 2024.

2 This Writ Petition was filed seeking quashing and setting

aside the Order dated 22^nd August, 2011.

3 It is the case of the Applicant that when the Petition was taken up for admission on 29^th March, 2012, this Court was pleased to issue Rule, grant interim reliefs during the pendency of the Writ Petition and direct the Applicant to deposit the amount as granted under the

impugned award in Court.

4 It is the case of the Applicant that the Applicant has on 17^th April, 2012 deposited in this Court a sum of Rs.2,55,918/- as per the Order dated 29^th March, 2012 passed by this Court. Further, it is the case of the Applicant that the Applicant was diligently appearing in Court.

However, the matter could not taken up due to paucity of time.

5 The Applicant states that after the last date i.e. 11^th November, 2019, the Writ Petition did not come up on board of this Court. 6 It is further the case of the Applicant that it came to the notice of the Advocate for the Applicant that Interim Application No. 2445 of 2025 was filed in this Writ Petition and was on the board of this Court on 6^th October, 2025.

7 It is the case of the Applicant that the Applicant was not served the said Interim Application. It is further the case of the Applicant that the Advocate of the Applicant had appeared in the matter on that date and was informed that the said Interim Application was taken out by Respondent No.1 for recovery of the said sum of Rs.2,55,918/-.

8 Thereafter, the Applicant realized on checking the status report of the Petition that the Writ Petition was on board of this Court on 24^th April, 2024 when it was dismissed for non-prosecution as none of the parties had appeared.

9 It is the case of the Applicant that the Applicant has been diligently following the matter and, therefore, the Writ Petition ought to be restored to the file of this Court.

10 The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.1 states that the submissions made by the Advocate for the Appellant are not acceptable and that the matter reached before this Court on 8^th June, 2015 when none appeared on behalf of the Petitioner and the matter was placed under the caption “for dismissal”.

11 On perusal of the Application and on consideration of the arguments of the parties, in my view, the Applicant has shown some cause for the condonation of delay of 545 days, but the same is not completely satisfactory. Therefore, the Interim Application will have to be allowed subject to payment of costs.

12 Accordingly, the following Order is passed:-

(i) The Interim Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c), subject to the Applicant paying to Respondent No.1 costs of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) within a period of two weeks from today;

(ii) Prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c) read as under:-

“(a) That in the interest of justice, this Honourable Court be pleased to condone the delay of about 545 days (One year Six months) in filing this Application for restoration of the Writ Petition No.2399 of 2011;

(b) That this Honourable Court be pleased to set aside the Order of dismissal of the Writ Petition No