High Court of Gujarat

THE GUJARAT SHEEP AND WOOL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTDversusHIMATLAL TAPUBHAI SAPARA

Disposal: 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
Bench: C DOSHI

Holding

The court condoned the 185‑day delay and restored the second appeal.

Summary

The Gujarat Sheep and Wool Development Corporation filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 185‑day delay in filing a petition for restoration of a second appeal. The respondent opposed, arguing that the decree under appeal had already been executed, rendering restoration futile. The court examined the explanations for delay and noted that the earlier dismissal was due to the advocate’s non‑appearance, granting the applicant a chance to present its merits. It held that the delay could be condoned and ordered the restoration of the second appeal. The respondent's contention regarding execution of the decree was left open for determination in the appeal proceedings.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 185 days in filing a restoration application can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Whether a second appeal can be restored when the decree under appeal has already been executed.

Legislation cited

Limitation Acts. 5

Subjects

condonation of delayLimitation Actrestoration of appealdecree executioncivil procedure

Judgment

  C/CA/3155/2026(GJHC240525862026)                                 ORDER DATED: 24/08/2026




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3155 of
                               2026
             In R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION/2124/2026
                   In R/SECOND APPEAL/47/2005
                               With
           R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2124 of 2026
                                 In
                R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 47 of 2005
==========================================================
THE GUJARAT SHEEP AND WOOL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.
                          Versus
                HIMATLAL TAPUBHAI SAPARA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANKIT Y BACHANI(5424) for the Applicant
MR NK MAJMUDAR for the Respondent
==========================================================
 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI

                                     Date : 24/08/2026

IA ORDER IN DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION

        Heard learned advocate Mr. Ankit Banchani for the
applicant. Learned advocate Mr. NK Majmudar states at bar
that he has instructions to appear for the respondent and he
shall    le Vakalatnama in due course. Registry to accept the
same.


        In an application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act, the
applicant prayed to condone the delay of 185 days caused in
 ling the application for restoration of the captioned Second
Appeal . Learned advocate Mr. Majmudar hotly contested the
delay     condonation           application            as   well      as     restoration
application mainly on the ground that the decree impugned in
the Second Appeal has been executed and therefore, now



                                         Page 1 of 2
       C/CA/3155/2026(GJHC240525862026)                                                  ORDER DATED: 24/08/2026




  nothing remains in the Second Appeal.                                              Thus, restoring the
  Second Appeal would be a futile exercise.


             Having            considered                the        averments                made           in       the
  application as well as submission canvassed by the learned
  advocate Mr. Majmudar, this Court thought it                                                    t to condone
  the delay, more particularly, when the applicant has explained
  the delay su-iciently.                         The second appeal was dismissed on
  the fault of learned advocate, who did not remain present in
  the matter and therefore, the applicant should be given one
  chance to put its case on merit.


             In the result, present CA is allowed and delay of 185
  days caused in                   ling the application for restoration is hereby
  condoned. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent.


             The contention of learned advocate Mr. Majmudar for
  the respondent that the decree impugned in the Second
  Appeal has been satis ed is kept open to be decided during
  appeal proceedings.

  IA ORDER IN RESTORATION APPLICATION


             Considering the facts stated in the application, present
  Application is required to be allowed and the same is allowed
  and main matter is restored to its original le.



                                                                                                   (J. C. DOSHI,J)
  SHEKHAR P. BARVE


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SHEKHAR PRAFULBHAI BARVE(HC00200), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 24/08/2026 17:13:11



                                                        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