UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.versusJAYANTIBHAI JOITARAM PRAJAPATI
- Disposal
- 53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE
- Bench
- C DOSHI
Holding
The Court exercised its discretion and condoned the 135‑day delay in filing the appeal.
Summary
The United India Insurance Company Ltd. filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of a 135‑day delay in preferring a first appeal against a judgment and decree of a civil suit. The appeal was delayed beyond the prescribed period, and the respondents were served but did not appear. The Court considered the reasons stated in the petition memo and exercised its discretionary power to condone the delay. Consequently, the Court ordered that the 135‑day delay be condoned and directed the registry to record the names of the counsel for the respondents. The order was signed by Justice J.C. Doshi on 8 June 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether the 135‑day delay in filing the first appeal can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963?
Legislation cited
Subjects
Judgment
C/CA/4748/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/06/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 4748 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL/27577/2025
==========================================================
UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
Versus
JAYANTIBHAI JOITARAM PRAJAPATI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SALIL M THAKORE(5821) for the Respondent(s) No. 6
MS PS PALMER(1456) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5
RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1,7
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 08/06/2026
ORDER
1. Delay is condoned.
2. The appeal has a delay of 135 days caused in preferring
first appeal against the judgment and decree passed in Civil
Suit No.2131 of 2020 by the City Civil and Sessions Court at
Ahmedabad.
3. The United India Insurance Company Limited has filed
this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
4. Heard learned Advocate Ms. Kirti Pathak for the
appellant. Respondent nos.1 and 7 are served but none has
remained present. I have also heard learned Advocate Ms. PS
Page 1 of 2
C/CA/4748/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/06/2026
Palmeri for respondent nos.2 to 5 and learned Advocate Mr.
Salil M Thakore for respondent no.6.
5. Considering the reasons stated in the petition memo, I
am satisfied to exercise the discretionary form of petition.
6. Accordingly, delay of 135 days is condoned. Registry is
directed to show the names of learned Advocate Ms. PS
Palmeri and learned Advocate Mr. Salil M Thakore in the first
appeals.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
PARMAR KRISH
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: PARMAR KRISH(HC02348), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 08/06/2026 18:23:18
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.