T.K.RAKSHIT Vs. HARI B.MEHTANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 12.10.1983 passed by the Division Bench of the Small Causes Court at Bombay in Application dated 3.10.1983 in Appeal Stamp No.3459/1983 in R.A.E. Suit No.577/2116/1980. By that order, the appellate court rejected the application filed by the petitioner for condonation of delay. The appeal was filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment and decree dated 19.4.1983 passed by the Small Causes Court at Bombay in R.A.E. Suit No.577/2116/1980. That civil suit was filed by the respondents claiming therein that they are owners of the suit premises of which the petitioner is tenant. The trial Court decreed the suit. There was delay involved in filing the appeal. For condonation of that delay, the application was filed by the petitioner.

(2.) PERUSAL of the order of the appellate court shows that the appellate court has given reasons in detail for refusing to condone the delay. In fact, the appellate court has observed that the conduct of the petitioner shows that he was merely interested in continuing the ad-interim stay which he had secured without notice to the respondents. When the petition was called for final hearing, none appeared for the petitioner. In view of the elaborate reasons that have been given by the appellate court for refusing to condone the delay and specially the finding that the petitioner was not interested in prosecuting the appeal but was merely interested in continuing to enjoy the benefits of the ex-parte interim order secured by him, I do not think that this is a fit case where this court should interfere with the discretion exercised by the appellate court, in exercise of jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.