Shivaji Ramrao Dhore v. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 23 Nov 2012
- Bench
- S V GANGAPURWALA
Outcome
Allowed
In the light of the above, present applications are allowed
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 rr. 22, 33
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. In the light of the above, present applications are allowed. The delay is condoned. The civil applications are disposed of. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/Nov. 12
Judgment
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3577 OF 2008 Shivaji Ramrao Dhore .. Applicant Versus Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation through its Executive Engineer and others .. Respondents Shri S. B. Ghatol Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri Sonwane, Advocate h/f Shri S. G. Sangle, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Smt. R. K. Ladda, A.G.P. for Respondents/State. C. A. NO. 13160 OF 2012 IN X OBJ. ST. NO. 29402 OF 2012 WITH IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 3514 OF 2008 WITH C. A. NO. 13159 OF 2012 IN X OBJ. ST. NO. 29413 OF 2012 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 3575 OF 2008 WITH C. A. NO. 13158 OF 2012 IN X OBJ. ST. NO. 29408 OF 2012 IN 2 ca 13157.12 FIRST APPEAL NO. 3481 OF 2008 CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 23RD NOVEMBER, 2012. PER COURT : . These are the applications for condonation of delay caused in filing cross objections.
Shri Sonwane, the learned counsel holding for Shri Sangle, the learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 opposes the applications on the ground no sufficient cause is stated in the applications. There is inordinate delay.
The first appeals are already admitted. The cross objections are only with regard to quantum of compensation. The same can be considered U/O 41 Rule 22 & 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure. There would be no impediment to allow the applicants to file the cross objections.
Operative part
In the light of the above, present applications are allowed. The delay is condoned. The civil applications are disposed of. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/Nov. 12
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In the light of the above, present applications are allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — rr. 22, 33.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 23 Nov 2012. The bench was S V GANGAPURWALA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.