UNION OF INDIAversusMUKTABEN PREMJIBHAI KOLI
- Disposal
- 33-CA DISPOSED OF
- Bench
- HEMANT M PRACHCHHAK
Holding
The Court held that the delay was condonable and allowed the condonation.
Summary
The Union of India filed an application seeking condonation of a 92‑day delay in filing Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 5172/2026, which was intended to review a judgment of the High Court dated 14 October 2025 in First Appeal No. 3733/2012. The respondents, represented by Mr. PJ Mehta, opposed the condonation, arguing that an execution application had already been filed against the appellant. The Court examined the explanations provided in the applicant’s petition, particularly those in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the application. Finding that the applicant had shown sufficient cause for the delay, the Court decided that the delay could be condoned. Consequently, the Court ordered that the delay in filing the review application be condoned. The application was thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 92 days in filing a review application under Order 47 of the CPC can be condoned.
Subjects
Judgment
C/CA/3452/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/08/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3452 of
2026
In F/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION/5172/2026
In R/FIRST APPEAL/3733/2012
==========================================================
UNION OF INDIA
Versus
MUKTABEN PREMJIBHAI KOLI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARSHEEL D SHUKLA(6158) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PJ MEHTA(467) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
PRACHCHHAK
Date : 10/08/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. The application is led by the applicant to condone the
delay of 92 days occurred in preferring Misc. Civil Application no.
5172 of 2026 seeking review of judgment passed by this Court in
First Appeal no. 3733 of 2012 dated 14.10.2025.
2. Mr. PJ Mehta, learned counsel for the respondents –
accused has vehemently opposed the application and submitted
that the execution application was already led by the
respondents against the appellant.
3. Considering the submissions canvassed by the learned
counsel for the respective parties and the averments made in
the application, more particularly, the explanation given in
paragraphs 2 and 3, this Court nds that su.cient cause is made
out to condone the delay.
Page 1 of 2
C/CA/3452/2026 ORDER DATED: 10/08/2026
4. In view of the above, the delay occurred in preferring Misc.
Civil Application no. 5172 of 2026 seeking review of judgment
passed by this Court in First Appeal no. 3733 of 2012 dated
14.10.2025 is hereby condoned.
5. The present application stands disposed of accordingly.
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
ANUSRI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ANUSRI VASU(HC02352), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 13/08/2026 18:36:27
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.