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

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - BENCH AT GOA
KEDAR RAMAKANT KAKODKAR – Appellant
Versus
AUDUTH TIMBLO – Respondent
MCA 944/2019



07-MCA-944-2019.DOC

Andreza

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 944 OF 2019

IN

STAMP APPLICATION NO. 3497 OF 2019 (FILING)

1. Kedar Ramakant Kakodkar

…Applicant

Versus

Auduth Timblo

…Respondents

Mr Rajendra Pai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Nikhil Vaze,

Advocate for the Applicant.

Mr. S. S. Kantak, Senior Advocate with Mr.Preetam

Talaulikar, Advocate for the Respondent-Original Appellant in

FA No. 95 of 2019.

CORAM:

M. S. SONAK, J

DATED:

27th July, 2021

PC:-

1.

The learned Counsel for the parties state that they have no

objection to this Bench taking up this matter.

2.

Heard Mr. Rajendra Pai, learned Senior Advocate for the

Applicant and Mr. S. S. Kantak, learned Senior Advocate for the

Respondent.

3.

This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing

the Cross Objections.

4.

The application states that there is in fact no delay as such

but, as a matter of abundant caution, this application has been

Page 1 of 2

27th July 2021

07-MCA-944-2019.DOC

filed seeking condonation of delay of about 40 days. Reasons

have been set out for such delay. Mr. Pai, learned Senior

Advocate submits that such reasons constitute sufficient cause.

5.

Mr. S. S. Kantak, learned Senior Advocate for the

Respondent, submits that the Cross Objections are not

maintainable and, therefore, even the application seeking

condonation of delay is not maintainable and must be dismissed.

6.

According to me, the issue of maintainability of Cross

Objections can be kept open but, the delay, assuming that there is

any norm, can be condoned. There is sufficient cause shown in

the application to explain the delay of about 40 days in filing the

Cross Objections.

7.

Accordingly, the delay in filing the Cross Objections is

condoned. However, the issue of maintainability of the Cross

Objections is specifically kept open and will be considered at the

time when the First Appeal and the Cross Objections are taken up

for consideration.

8.

Misc. Civil Application No. 944 of 2019 is disposed of in

the aforesaid terms.

M. S. SONAK, J.

Page 2 of 2

27th July 2021

ANDREZA PEREIRA

Digitally signed by ANDREZA

PEREIRA

Date: 2021.07.27 17:41:42 +05'30'

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top