High Court of Gujarat

FALGUNIBEN NIKUNJBHAI RATHODversusNIKUNJBHAI LILADHARBHAI RATHOD

Disposal: 53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE
Bench: SANGEETA K VISHENNISHA M THAKORE

Holding

The Court held that the delay was sufficiently explained and therefore condoned.

Summary

The applicant filed a first appeal 56 days after the decree, exceeding the prescribed period. The delay was attributed to the applicant's ill health and the need to care for her ailing parents. The applicant sought condonation of the delay, arguing that it was bona fide. The learned counsel reiterated these grounds before the Court. Exercising its discretion, the Court found the explanation satisfactory and ordered the delay to be condoned. Consequently, the civil application for condonation was allowed without any order as to costs.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 56 days in filing a first appeal can be condoned on the ground of the applicant's and her parents' health issues.

Subjects

condonation of delayfirst appealcivil procedurejudicial discretionhealth grounds

Judgment

     C/CA/6175/2025                             ORDER DATED: 26/02/2026




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 6175 of
                               2025
                  In F/FIRST APPEAL/37882/2025

==========================================================
                       FALGUNIBEN NIKUNJBHAI RATHOD
                                    Versus
                      NIKUNJBHAI LILADHARBHAI RATHOD
==========================================================
Appearance:
JAY J JANI(9303) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR TEJAS S TRIVEDI(5692) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.DIPEN F CHAUDHARI(6740) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
       and
       HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE

                       Date : 26/02/2026
                         ORAL ORDER
       (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN)

      Learned advocate for the applicant has tendered a draft
amendment. Amendment is allowed in terms of the draft. Same
shall be carried out forthwith.

2.    By this application, the applicant has prayed to condone the
delay of 56 days caused in preferring the captioned First Appeal.

3.    Mr Jay J. Jani, learned advocate for the applicant has made
submissions along the lines of the avernments made in the present
application. It is urged that the delay has occurred owing to the
health of the applicant, who was unwell and was taking treatment.
Besides, her parents are also having health issues and she was busy
with looking after their betterment. It is urged that the delay being
bona fide, be condoned.



                                  Page 1 of 2
        C/CA/6175/2025                                                             ORDER DATED: 26/02/2026




4.        Having regard to the averments, so also the submissions
made, this Court, exercising the discretion, is of the opinion that the
delay is sufficiently explained and deserves to be condoned and is
hereby condoned. Civil Application succeeds and is accordingly,
allowed. No order as to costs.




                                                                               (SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J)



                                                                                   (NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
BINOY B PILLAI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judges.
Digitally signed by: BINOY BALAKRISHNA PILLAI(HC00183), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 26/02/2026 14:50:02




                                                      Page 2 of 2

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "condonation of delay"Sign in to search