Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5942 (BOM)

PAPPU RAMLAL MISTRY v. V.VASUKI VELUSWAMI AND ANR

IA/6059/2026 · 2026-09-02

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

23-IA-6059-2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6059 OF 2026 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 13762 OF 2026 Pappu Ramlal Mistry … Applicant(s) Versus V. Vasuki Veluswami and another ...Respondent(s) _______ Mr. Anand Pai a/w Mr. Vinay Niar, Mr. Sahil Sayyed i/b Mr. Arun Panickar, Advocates for the Applicant. Mr. Ashutosh Kausik a/w Ms. Swati Dorairaj a/w Ms. Laxmi Mishra, Advocates for Respondent No. 1. Ms. Smriti Sanjeev i/b Mhatre Law Associates for Respondent No. 2. _______ CORAM: AARTI SATHE, J. DATE: 02nd SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C. 1. This interim application has been filed by the Applicant for condonation of delay of 52 days in filing the present First Appeal St. No. 13762 of 2026. On a perusal of the reasons as set out in the aforesaid Interim Application, explaining the delay that has been sought to be condoned, this Court is of the view that a sufficient cause has been made out and hence I am inclined to condone the aforesaid delay. Tiwari 23-IA-6059-2026.DOC 2. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have orally opposed the aforesaid Application. There is no written opposition filed to this application. Considering the well settled position in law in a catena of judgments of the Supreme Court in regard to the principles to be followed on condoning the delay, and in the clear facts and circumstances of the case, as set out in the memo of the application, the Applicant ought not to suffer or be rendered remediless in pursuing the appeal. 3. In the aforesaid circumstances, having perused the memo of the application and considering the period of delay not being very gross, in my opinion, the reasons as set out certainly provide for an appropriate justification and a sufficient cause shown by the Applicant in regard to the delay in filing the appeal. It is hence in the interest of justice that the delay is condoned. 4. In view thereof, Interim Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) Delay condoned. Appeal to be numbered. 5. Interim application is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (AARTI SATHE, J.) Tiwari