NON-REPORTABLE     

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.6501-6523 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Civil)Nos.17045-17067 of 2018)

Hetal Chirag Patel and Ors.    ...Appellants

                 Vs.

State of Gujarat and Ors.Etc.Etc.    ...Respondents

O R D E R    

 Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1. Issue notice.  Learned counsel for the respondents

accepted the notice and made a statement that they do

not  wish  to  file  any  counter  affidavit.   With  the

consent  of  all  the  parties,  the  matter  is  heard

finally.

2. Leave granted.

3. These appeals are filed against the common final

judgment and order dated 29.06.2018 passed by the High

Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Civil Application No.3

of 2018 in F/LPA No.36 of 2018 in SCA No.11163 of 2012

& other allied matters.

1

4. By the impugned order, the Division Bench dismissed

the appeals filed by the appellants on the ground of

delay of 233 days in filing the appeals.  In other

words, the Division Bench dismissed the applications

filed  by  the  appellants  under  Section  5  of  the

Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the

appeals holding inter alia that there was no sufficient

cause made out by the appellants in filing the appeals

which were delayed by 233 days.  It is against this

order, the appellants have felt aggrieved and filed

these  appeals  by  way  of  special  leave  before  this

Court.

5. Having heard learned senior counsel/learned counsel

for the parties and on perusal of the record of the

case, we are inclined to condone the delay in filing

the appeals by the appellants before the Division Bench

of the High Court.

6. In  our  opinion,  having  regard  to  the  facts  and

circumstances of the case and further keeping in view

of  the  fact that the appellants were not made parties

2

to the original writ petitions and became aggrieved by

the order passed by the writ Court (Single Judge) in

the writ petitions, a case for condonation of delay in

filing the appeals was made out.  It was, in our view,

a sufficient cause for condonation of delay within the

meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act.  The High

Court ought to have, in these circumstances, condoned

the delay and granted permission to file the appeals to

the appellants for being heard on merits.

7. In the light of the foregoing discussion, these

appeals succeed and are hereby allowed.  Impugned order

is set aside. All the inter-court appeals, out of which

these appeals arise, are restored to their respective

files.

8. Let  the  Division  bench  now  decide  the  appeals

finally in accordance with law.

9. Let  the  appeals  be  listed  for  further  orders

preferably next week before the Division Bench.

10. Parties are at liberty to apply before the Division

Bench for appropriate orders, pending appeals.

3

11. We,  however,  make  it  clear  that  we  have  not

expressed  any  opinion  on  the  merits  of  the

controversy  and  confined  only  to  the  issue  of

condonation  of  delay  in  filing  the  intra-court

appeals before the Division Bench of the High Court

against the writ court (Single Judge)order.

......................J.         [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]   

......................J.          [UDAY UMESH LALIT]      

New Delhi; July 11, 2018.

4