Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37727 (BOM)

SHRI JIVAN BHANUDAS SARADE AND ANR v. DAGADABAI RAMDAS ALIAS KRISHNA KSHIRSAGAR AND ORS

IA/6991/2024 · 2025-01-03

Gauri Godse

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

34.6991.24 ia.docx Iresh IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6991 OF 2024 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 971 OF 2006 Jivan Bhanuds Sarade and anr .....Applicants Vs. Dagadabai Ramdas Alias Krishna .....Respondents Kshirsgar and ors Mr. Abhijit Kulkarni a/w Mr. Abhishek Roy, Mr. Krushna Jaybhay for the applicants Mr. Dilip Bodake for respondents CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE : 3rd JANUARY 2025 ORDER: 1. This application is for bringing on record names of heirs and legal representatives of deceased appellant no. 2 on record. There is a delay in filing the application. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the reasons for the delay and the steps taken to file the application are explained in paragraph nos. 3 to 6 of the application. 1/2 IRESH MASHAL Digitally signed by IRESH MASHAL Date: 2025.01.04 10:52:20 +0530 34.6991.24 ia.docx 3. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 opposes the condonation of delay on the ground that though he had intimated death of appellant no. 2 to the advocate for the appellants, no steps were taken within time. 4. A perusal of the reply and the letter of the advocate for respondent nos. 1 to 3 indicates that the intimation of death was regarding deceased respondent no. 4 and not appellant no. 2. 5. I see no substance in the objections raised on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3. 6. The reasons explained in the application are justifiable and acceptable. In view fo the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned and the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) and (c). 7. Amendment to be carried out within three weeks. [GAURI GODSE, J.] 2/2