HMK 43. IA-30650-2022.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30650 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30651 OF 2022 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 10737 OF 2021 ALONG WITH FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 10737 OF 2021 Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation, Mumbai & Ors. ….Applicants/Appellants Versus BPM Industries Ltd., Mumbai .…Respondent __________________________________________________________________ Ms. Pallavi Khale i/by Ms. Komal Punjabi for the Applicants/Appellants. Mr. Siddharth Samantray a/w. Mr. Sahil Pandire & Mr. Ashok S. Pandire i/by Mr. Dinesh Shinde for the Respondent. __________________________________________________________________ CORAM : JITENDRA JAIN, J. DATED : 30th APRIL 2026 P. C. : INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30650 OF 2022 1. This application is filed by the Corporation for seeking condonation of delay of 03 years and 38 days in challenging the order of the Small Causes Court, determining the rateable value. 2. On 14th February, 2018, the impugned judgment was passed. Certified copy of the judgment was received on 01st March, 2018. On 29th November, 2018 a letter from Assessment Department informing the Legal Department to challenge the impugned order was received by the legal team. 1 of 3 2026:BHC-AS:20895 HMK 43. IA-30650-2022.doc 3. From March 2018 to November 2018 the only reason given is that the assessment department after studying the facts came to the conclusion that the appeal has to be filed. Other than this bald averment, there is nothing stated for the period from March 2018 to November 2018. No reason why 08 months for studying one matter was taken. 4. The appeal was filed on 07th May, 2021. There is no explanation whatsoever from November 2018 to May 2021, except general reasons given that the officers changed, papers were sent for typing the appeal memo, etc. and due to voluminous work some time was consumed for preparing and approving the draft. Other than these reasons, there is nothing stated and moreso nothing annexed to the civil application in support thereof. In my view, the reasons given are bereft of any “sufficient cause”. 5. This Court had an occasion to consider these very reasons of delay in the case of this very Corporation in the case of Brihan Mumbai Mahanagar Palika & Anr. vs. Ashirwad Shelters Private Limited1, wherein such reasons were rejected and the condonation was refused. 6. The reasons given herein are no different than the reasons in the case of Ashirwad Shelters Private Limited (Supra). The decision of Ashirwad Shelters Private Limited was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Special Leave Petition No. 16595 of 2026 was dismissed on 10th April, 2026. 7. In the case of the sister concern of this very respondent, this Court on 17th March, 2026 had also refused condonation on these very grounds in Interim Application No. 30412 of 2022. 1 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 5140 2 of 3 HMK 43. IA-30650-2022.doc 8. Adopting the reasoning given in all the above decisions, the present Interim Application No. 30650/2022 is also dismissed. 9. Consequently, First Appeal (St.) No. 10737/2021 & Interim Application No. 30651/2022 are also stand dismissed. However, the issue of rateable value is kept open. [ JITENDRA JAIN, J. ] 3 of 3 Signed by: Sayyed Saeed Ali Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 02/05/2026 14:08:23