Hetal Chirag Patel vs The State Of Gujarat

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.6501-6523 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Civil)Nos.17045-17067 of 2018)

Hetal Chirag Patel and Ors. ...Appellants

Vs.

State of Gujarat and Ors.Etc.Etc. ...Respondents

O R D E R

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1. Issue notice. Learned counsel for the respondents

accepted the notice and made a statement that they do

not wish to file any counter affidavit. With the

consent of all the parties, the matter is heard

finally.

2. Leave granted.

3. These appeals are filed against the common final

judgment and order dated 29.06.2018 passed by the High

Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Civil Application No.3 Signature Not Verified of 2018 in F/LPA No.36 of 2018 in SCA No.11163 of 2012 Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA Date: 2018.07.12 17:10:31 IST Reason: & other allied matters.

1

4. By the impugned order, the Division Bench dismissed

the appeals filed by the appellants on the ground of

delay of 233 days in filing the appeals. In other

words, the Division Bench dismissed the applications

filed by the appellants under Section 5 of the

Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the

appeals holding inter alia that there was no sufficient

cause made out by the appellants in filing the appeals

which were delayed by 233 days. It is against this

order, the appellants have felt aggrieved and filed

these appeals by way of special leave before this

Court.

5. Having heard learned senior counsel/learned counsel

for the parties and on perusal of the record of the

case, we are inclined to condone the delay in filing

the appeals by the appellants before the Division Bench

of the High Court.

6. In our opinion, having regard to the facts and

circumstances of the case and further keeping in view

of the fact that the appellants were not made parties

2 to the original writ petitions and became aggrieved by

the order passed by the writ Court (Single Judge) in

the writ petitions, a case for condonation of delay in

filing the appeals was made out. It was, in our view,

a sufficient cause for condonation of delay within the

meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The High

Court ought to have, in these circumstances, condoned

the delay and granted permission to file the appeals to

the appellants for being heard on merits.

7. In the light of the foregoing discussion, these

appeals succeed and are hereby allowed. Impugned order

is set aside. All the inter-court appeals, out of which

these appeals arise, are restored to their respective

files.

8. Let the Division bench now decide the appeals

finally in accordance with law.

9. Let the appeals be listed for further orders

preferably next week before the Division Bench.

10. Parties are at liberty to apply before the Division

Bench for appropriate orders, pending appeals.

3

11. We, however, make it clear that we have not

expressed any opinion on the merits of the

controversy and confined only to the issue of

condonation of delay in filing the intra-court

appeals before the Division Bench of the High Court

against the writ court (Single Judge)order.

......................J. [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]

......................J. [UDAY UMESH LALIT]

New Delhi;

July 11, 2018.

4