Bombay High Court
PANNALAL KALLUPRASAD NIRMALversusRAJKUMARI RAMPYARE NIRMAL
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court condoned the delay in filing the civil revision application and allowed the interim application.
Summary
The applicant, Pannalal Kalluprasad Nirmal, sought condonation of a 23‑day delay in filing a civil revision against a decree dated 31 August 2023. He had mistakenly filed an appeal before the District Court, believing that an appeal under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 was maintainable there. Upon realizing the error, he obtained permission from the District Judge to withdraw the improper proceeding and file the correct revision. The High Court examined whether the delay could be condoned given the applicant’s good‑faith mistake and the need to serve substantive justice. It held that the delay was excusable and that the revision should be allowed to proceed. Accordingly, the interim application was allowed, the delay was condoned, and the revision was scheduled for admission.
Issues considered
- Whether a civil revision application filed after a delay can be condoned when the delay resulted from a mistaken belief about the maintainability of an appeal under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
Legislation cited
- Specific Relief Act, 1963 — s. 6
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- civil revision
- Specific Relief Act
- appeal maintainability
- procedural law
- substantive justice
Judgment
6 IA-13850-25.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13850 OF 2025
IN
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO. 30131 OF 2025
Pannalal Kalluprasad Nirmal ..Applicant
Versus
Rajkumari Rampyare Nirmal & ors. …Respondents
Ms. Poonam K Pal, i/b Mr. Sachin Hande, for the Applicant.
Mr. B K Bali a/w Ms. Veena Nair i/b Bali Associates, for
Respondent No.1.
CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J.
DATE : 01st September 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Ms. Pal, the learned Counsel for the Applicant, and
Mr. Bali, the learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1.
2. This is an application for condonation of delay in
preferring the Civil Revision Application against a judgment and
decree dated 31st August, 2023 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior
Division, Kalyan in RCS No.172/2008.
3. It appears that, against the said judgment and decree, the
applicant had inadvertently filed a proceeding before the District
Court in the nature of an appeal with an application for
condonation of delay of 23 days. When it was realized that,
SAINATH, PA 1/3
6 IA-13850-25.DOC
against an order passed by the Court under Section 6 of the
Specific Relief Act, 1963, an appeal is not maintainable, an
application was filed before the District Judge, seeking
permission to withdraw the application and file an appropriate
proceeding before the appropriate forum.
4. By an order dated 10th January, 2025, the learned District
Judge permitted the applicant to withdraw the application with
liberty to file an appropriate proceeding.
5. It appears that, the applicant had moved the District
Court under a wrong impression that, an appeal against the
decree passed by the trial Court under Section 6 of the Specific
Relief Act, 1963 was maintainable before the District Court. As
the said proceeding was prosecuted in good faith under an
incorrect impression about the maintainability of the appeal,
and to advance the cause of substantive justice, this Court
considers it appropriate to condone the delay in filing the
revision application.
6. Hence, the following order :-
::ORDER::
(i) The Interim Application stands allowed.
(ii) The delay in filing the Civil Revision Application
stands condoned.
SAINATH, PA 2/3
6 IA-13850-25.DOC
(iii) The Civil Revision Application be listed for
admission as a fresh matter on 07 th September,
2026.
[N. J. JAMADAR, J.]
SAINATH, PA 3/3
Checking your session…