VICTOR ALBUQUERQUE Vs. SARASWAT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for condonation of delay of 182 days in filing an appeal against the order dated 15th March 1997 passed by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji in Civil Misc. Application No. 252/96/b in Special Civil Suit No. 132/96/b. It is the case of the applicant that he did not challenge the order dated 15th March 1997, even after obtaining the certified copy thereof on 20th March 1997, till 15th December 1997 for the following reasons namely:-- (a) Prior to the passing of the order dated 15th March 1997, the applicant had already filed a comprehensive suit claiming for several reliefs and as such the applicant thought that there was no need of filing an appeal against the said order dated 15th March, 1997. (b) The applicant was holding compromise talks with respondent No. 3 regarding a global settlement between the parties and the same had reached in the final stage and the dispute seemed to be on the verge of amicable settlement and even adjournments were sought on several occasions on that count jointly by the parties. (c) The applicant bona fide thought that the filing of an appeal at that stage may only retard the settlement talks between the applicant and respondent No. 3, and the applicant did not want to precipitate the matter at that juncture, and, (d) It was only on 13th December 1997 on obtaining the advice of the Senior Counsel that the applicant realized that the implications of the findings of the trial Court in the said order would affect the proceedings in Special Civil Suit No. 41/97/b.

(2.) IN the said application it has also been stated by the applicant that the talks between the parties failed sometime towards the end of November 1997 and, accordingly, the applicant decided to pursue the suits filed by him. The application has been supported by the affidavit of the applicant.

(3.) THE application for condonation of delay is being objected to on various grounds by the respondents and in that regard the respondent No. 3 has filed his affidavit-in-reply. In the said affidavit, it is disclosed that on 6th May 1997 the applicant filed an affidavit-in-rejoinder in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 69/97/b in Special Civil Suit No. 41/97/b wherein the applicant categorically stated that he would refer and rely upon the judgment and order dated 15th March 1997, that is, the impugned judgment for the purpose of determining its true scope and import. It is further disclosed in the said affidavit that the talks for settlement were resumed after 17th June 1997 and the application for adjournment on the ground of talks of settlement was made only after 21st June 1997 and on failure of such talks of settlement, the applicant filed another application, being Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 283/97/b in Special Civil Suit No. 41/97/b on 20th October 1997 seeking to restrain the respondent No. 2 herein from holding its Board Meeting on 22nd October 1997 and considering the appointment of Additional Directors pursuant to the notice dated 17th October 1997. The said affidavit is accompanied by copies of various affidavits and pleadings filed by the applicant in Special Civil Suit No. 41/97/b as well as some correspondence between the parties.