Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs Mohammed Ashraf Abdul Karim Kapadia
- Neutral2017 INSC 814
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A delay in filing an appeal before a High Court may be condoned where, having considered the affidavit filed seeking condonation and heard both parties, the court is of the view that the delay is liable to be condoned.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10865 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 31660 OF 2016 ]
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI Appellant (s)
VERSUS
MOHAMMED ASHRAF ABDUL KARIM KAPADIA Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The first appeal before the High Court was
dismissed on the ground that there was a delay of 34
days in filing the appeal by the appellant-Municipal
Corporation of Greater Mumbai.
3. Having gone through the affidavit filed for
condonation of delay and having heard both the
parties, we are of the view that the delay was liable
to be condoned. Hence, the delay in filing the
appeal before the High Court is condoned.
3. The High Court is directed to take the appeal on
record.
4. In view of the above, this civil appeal is
disposed of.
No costs.
.......................J. Signature Not Verified [ KURIAN JOSEPH ] Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date: 2017.08.30 14:30:13 IST Reason: .......................J. [ R. BANUMATHI ]
New Delhi;
August 25, 2017.
ITEM NO.11 COURT NO.5 SECTION IX
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 31660/2016
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-04-2016 in CA No. 1414/2016 in FA (ST) No. 10792/2016 in LCS No. 1703/2010 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Bombay)
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
MOHAMMED ASHRAF ABDUL KARIM KAPADIA Respondent(s)
Date : 25-08-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Atul Yeshwant Chitale, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Suchitra Atul Chitale, AOR Ms. Shivangi Khanna, Adv.
Mr. Pravin V. Naik, Adv.
Ms. Tanvi Kakar, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. S. M. Jadhav, Adv.
For M/s. S.M. Jadhav And Company (Appearance slip not given)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed
non-reportable Judgment
Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (RENU DIWAN) COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free