Sub:- Order of The Hon. Maharashtra State Co.Op. Appellate Court, Mumbai Bench At Aurangabad.
Sir, As per order of The Hon. Maharashtra State Co.Op. Appellate Court, Mumbai Bench At Aurangabad. Please find the D.D. drawn from SVC Bank Ltd. Jalgaon Bearing No. 565311 Dt. 09/11/2020 Of. Rs. 5000/- (Rs. Five Thousand only). As the cost imposed by the Hon. Court. Please acknowledge the receipt of the same. Thank you...
Vijay Kanhaiyalal Rawlani.
Enclosed: 1> Court Order Copy. TRUE COPY 2> D.D. Sum Of Rs. 5000/- details above Godavari Laxmi Co-op. Bank Ltd.Jalgaon
Managing Directoy BY HAND
Dt. 09/11/2020
To, The Branch Manager
Godavari Laxmi Co. oprative
Bank Limited.
Navipeth, Bank Street Jalgaon.
Dear Sir
Sub:- Order of The Hon. Maharashtra State Co.Op. Appellate Court, Mumbai Bench At Aurangabad.
Sir, As per order of The Hon.Maharashtra State Co.Op. Appellate Court,
Mumbai Bench At Aurangabad. Please find the D.D. drawn from SVvC Bank Ltd. Jalgaon. Bearing No. 565310 Dt. 09/11/2020 Of. Rs. 5000/- (Rs. Five Thousand only). As the cost imposed by the Hon. Court. Please acknowledge the receipt of the same. Thank you..
Manoharlal Wadhumal Rawlani.
(
Enclosed: 1> Court Order Copy. 2> D.D. Sum Of Rs. 5000/- details above tRUE COPY Godavari Laxmi Co-op. Bank Ltd.Jalgaon
Managing DIrecza 1 Misc. Application No.19 of 2020. Go-opperativAep Courtate Received on 30-06- 2020 Registered on 30- 06-2020 rtx Decided on 02-11 - 2020 Bench Aurangab Duration Year Month Days 00-04 - 03
THE MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-0P. APPELLATE COURT,
MUMBAI BENCHATAURANGABAD.
(BEFORE SMT. S.RPA WAR, MEMBER )
Misc. Application No. 19 of 2020
1) Vijay Kanyyalal Rawalani,
Age : 60 Years, Occu. Business, R/o. 14, Sant Hardasram Housing ) Society, Jalgaon, Tq. &Dist. Jalgaon. ) 2) Manoharlal Vadhumal Rawalani, Age:- 63 Years, Occu. Business, Rlo. Near Akashwani, Ring Rod, Jalgaon, Tq. &Dist. Jalgaon. ..Applicants (Ori. Opp. nos.3 &4) VERSUS
Godavari LaxmiCooperative Bank Ltd.,
Jalgaon, Branch 31, Navipeth, Bank Street, Jalgaon, Tq. &Dist. Jalgaon. through its Managing Director. (Original Res. no.1) 2) M/s. Manohar, Prop. Kanayyalal Vadhumal Rawalani (Died), R/o. 100, 101 Fule Market, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon. 3) Kishandas Vadhumal Rawalani, Age : 80 Years, Occu. Business, Rlo. Sand Hardasram Housing Society, Jalgaon, Tq. &Dist. Jalgaon. ...Respondents (Original Res. nos.I &2) Mr. K. M. Bardapurkar, Ld. Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. D.S. Khamat, Ld. Advocate for Respondent no.1. Respondent nos.2 served noted absent. Respondent no.4 died. 2 Misc. Application No.19 of 2020.
AURANGABAD. DATE 02.11.2020. Maharasht
ORAL JUDGMENT (Dictated and pronounced in the open court) Be
Perused the Misc. Application, heard Mr. K. M.
Bardapurkar, Ld. Advocate for the appliants &Mr. D. S. Khamat, Ld. Advocate for the respondent no.l. (who is main contesting party) ( Respondent no.2 served noted absent &respondent no.3 noted died.
2) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment &
award dated 17.12.2019 passed by the Ld. Trial Judge Cooperative Court, Jalgaon, in dispute bearing no.J-861/2004. The applicants intend to file an appeal before this court, as there is delay of l18 days in filing the appeal, the present application has been field by the applicant for condonation of delay.
( 3) By fling the application, it is contended by the applicants that, the respondent no.I has filed recovery dispute againsT them as (
well as respondent nos.2 &3. In the said matter they have appeared before the trial court and strongy contested the dispute. After recording evidence the Ld. trial judge has passed judgment &award on 17.12.2019. Thereafter, on 16.1.2020 the applicants have applied for certified copies, but for one reason or other copies are not provided to them till 11.6.2020. They have obtained the certifled copies on ll.6.2020, and thereaqfter immediately they tried to file an appeal but as there was an objection from office side in respect of delay. They have filed the present application on 29.6.2020. It is 3 Misc. Application No.19 of 2020. contended that, the delay caused is not intentional one, the applicants have good case on merit. If delay is not condoned they will suffer .ateco-operati Would be great loss, on the contrary if the delay is condoned no loss caused to respondent no.1. In "such circumstances delay needs to be condoned. Thus, the applicants have urged for condonation of delay ch Aur angabad by allowing this application.
4) This application is strongly resisted by the respondent
no.l Bank on the ground that, "the application filed by the applicants contention of is not legal and valid, same is after thought'. It is main respondent no.l that, 'the applicants have knowledge about the judgment, on the date of passing of judgmnent i. e. on 17.12.2019. The respondent no.l / disaputant bank has obtained certified copy on 14.1.2020, the judgment was ready on 17.12.2019 itself. The applicants did not turn to the trial court för obtaining the certified the copy, it was when the notice of execution has been served. applicants are trying to prolong the matter. They have not mentioned could any cogent and convincing reason as to why they immediately not approach before the court and obtained copy of judgment. The reason mentioned by the applicants are not bonafide, just &sufficient for condonation of delay. Since, beginning the applicants were fully aware about the proceeding filed by the respondent no.1, which was filed in the year 2004. The present application is filed only with a view to prolong the execution of lawful decree, which is in the hands of respondent no.1. The application is not legal and valid, hence the application be dismissed with cost.
5) Considering the pleadings of parties and after hearing
LA. Advocate for the respective parties, following points arise for my 4 Misc, Application No.19 of 2020. consideration. ctatt
POINT FINDINGS
1) Whether the applicant pYoves that,
the delay of l18 days caused in .hAur As perfinal order filing the appeal is bonafide one ? 2) What order, what relief ? As perfinal order
REASONS POINT NOS. I &2: 6) Ihave already narrated the application as well as reply filed by respondent no.1, hence no need to repeat.
7) Admittedly, there is a delay of ll8 days in presenting the
appeal before this Court. The delay counted after excluding the period of limitation. After perusal of the certified cocpy of judgment, it is evident that, the Ld. trial judge has signed the judgment on 17.12.2019, hence the judgment was ready by all means on the said date. The bank has obtained certified copy on 14.1.2020, it appears from the certified copy that, the applicants apply for the first time on 16.1.2020. If the copy is not provided to them till 11.6.2020, then the question arise "why the applicants kept mum for a considerable period of 6 months, and not raised any objection before the Ld. trial judge for not providing certified copy to them 2" The applicants are unable to file any sort of complaint made by them before trial court, or the copy of receipt of payment made by them towards the certified copy, thus, it appears from the conduct of applicants that, they made application on 16.1.2020, but thereafter, did not turn to the trial court 5 Misc. Application No.19 of 2020. till 11.6.2020 for getting the certified copies, and now trying to blame Co-Oper Appeir the office of trial court for delay and delivering the copy. This is the only ground mentioned by the applicants which appears to be not bonafide one. Naw, they tried t¡ get the benefit of the situation arises . find any out of emergence of the pandemic of Covid-19, but I do not judge force, in this ground, because, the judgment,passed by the trial the last was of December 2019 and the Covid-19 pandemic emerge in week ofMarch 2020.
8). Be it as may, as the applicants intend to challenge the
award passed by the trial judge, even though there is a delay. Admittedly, award yet to be executed. In such circumstances, if an opportunity is given to the applicants of being heard there will be finality to the judgment passed by the trial judge, thus, I intent to allow the application. But, all these happens due to the negligence on
the part of applicants, hence; application is allowed subject to cost of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand each applicant) to be paid by the applicants to the respondents on or..befor 26.1l. 2020. The appeal will be registered after verifing the reçeipt af the cost payment. If ) the applicants failed to deposit the cost, the þresent application stands dismissed. On this condition of payment onty the appeal can be registered & taken up for hearing. Considering all the aspects following order is passed.
ORDER 1) The Misc. Application No.I9 of 2020 is hereby allowed to subject to cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by the applicants in favour ofthe respondent no.I on or before 26.11.2020. 6 Misc. Application No.19 of 2020. coOperatibe Ap e Manarara 2) The concern clerk is directed fist to see whether the direction as, mentioned in clause 1 of this order
Bench Aurangaba is complied with or not. If, order is complied, then registeredhe appeal.
3) f the applicant failed to deposit the cost amount,
then the application stand dismissed.
4) R&P be callfrom the trial court.
( Place : Aurangabad. (Smt.S. R. Pawar) Member Date :- 2nd November 2020. Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court Mumbai Bench Aurangabad. Dictated and pronounced in the open Court. Order dictated on 02.11.2020. OrdeY transcribed on 02.11.2020. Order ready on 02.11.2020.
Copy Applicd on Copy Ready on Çopy Supplied on G 75 rasntrz Stale Co-0p. Appeilate TRUE COPY *svongibal Berch Godavari Laxm' Co;0p. Bank Ltd.Jaiy aon
