Bombay High Court
MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION.versusSMT.MANGAL APPASAHEB KHANDAGALE AND ORS.
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The court condoned the delay in filing the appeal.
Summary
The applicant, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, filed an application seeking condonation of a 213‑day delay in filing its appeal. The respondents were served but did not appear, and the applicant’s averments were not contested. The court found no mala fides on the part of the applicant and noted that the delay was not opposed. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion under the Civil Procedure Code to condone the delay. The appeal may now proceed on its merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the 213‑day delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- civil procedure
- appeal
- high court
- mala fides
Judgment
35-CAF-3019-2017=.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3019 OF 2017
IN
FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 24312 OF 2017
Digitally
signed by
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. … Applicant
UDAY
UDAY SHIVAJI
SHIVAJI JAGTAP
Date:
Vs.
JAGTAP 2026.09.04
13:22:09
+0530 Smt. Mangal Appasaheb Khandagale and Ors. … Respondents
………….
Mr. Ketan Patil a/w Pinki Bhansali for the Applicant
………….
CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
DATE : 2nd SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P. C. :
. Heard.
2. The applicant seeks condonation of delay of 213 days in filing the
appeal. The respondents are served but they have not caused
appearance.
3. The averments of the application have not been controverted.
There are no mala fides on the part of the applicant in filing the
application belatedly.
4. The delay stands condoned.
FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 24312 OF 2017
5. Admit.
Uday S. Jagtap 1 of 2
35-CAF-3019-2017=.doc
6. Call for record and proceeding.
7. Print is dispensed with.
8. The parties shall be at liberty to file reply, rejoinder or compilation
of documents.
( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. )
Uday S. Jagtap 2 of 2
Checking your session…