Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. Bombay High Court/
  4. 2024/
  5. December

Shri. Ramdas S/o Vitthalrao Kamdi vs. Union of India Through General Manager, Central Railway, C.s.t., Mumbai

Decided on 20 December 2024• Citation: CAO/1203/2024• Bombay High Court
Download PDF

Read Judgment


    2024:BHC-NAG:14265                                                            
                                            1                 30.cao.1203.24.odt  
                   IN THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  JUDICATURE   AT BOMBAY                
                               NAGPUR   BENCH  : NAGPUR                           
                     CIVIL APPLICATION   (CAO) NO.1203  OF 2024 IN                
                             M.C.A. ST. NO.18195 OF 2024 IN                       
                            FIRST APPEAL  NO.838 OF 2019 (D)                      
                           Ramdas S/o Vithhal Kambdi .Vs. Union of India          
             Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order           
             Coram, appearances, Court's Orders                                   
             or directions and Registrar's order                                  
                            Shri R.G. Bagul, Advocate for appellant.              
                            Ms Neerja Chaubey, Advocate for respondent.           
                                      CORAM    : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH,   J.         
                                      DATED    : 20/12/2024                       
                            1.        This is an application for condonation of delay
                            of 1181 days caused for filing application for restoration of
                            appeal which was dismissed for not submitting the paper
                            book within eight weeks prescribed by this Court.     
                            2.        Heard learned advocate for the appellant.   
                            3.        Perused the application.                    
                            4.        The  learned advocate for the appellant     
                            submitted that record and proceedings was not yet received
                            therefore, it was very difficult to prepare paper book. He
                            submits that, generally if paper book is not received then
                            this Court is dispensed with paper book with condition to
                            file copies of the deposition. He therefore submits to allow
                            the application.                                      
                            5.        Considering reasons stated in the application, it
                            appears that delay is not deliberately caused, the application

                                            2                 30.cao.1203.24.odt  
                            therefore deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice.
                            The application is allowed. Delay of 1181 days is condoned.
                            6.        Application is disposed.                    
                            M.C.A. ST. NO.18195 OF 2024                           
                            1.        This is an application for restoration of appeal.
                            2.        Heard learned advocate for the appellant.   
                            3.        Perused the application.                    
                            4.        The  learned advocate for the appellant     
                            submitted that record and proceedings was not yet received
                            therefore, it was very difficult to prepare paper book. He
                            submits that, generally if paper book is not received then
                            this Court is dispensed with paper book with condition to
                            file copies of the deposition. He therefore submits to allow
                            the application.                                      
                            5.        Considering reasons stated in the application,
                            the application deserves to be allowed in the interest of
                            justice. The application is allowed.                  
                            6.        Filing of paper book is dispensed with.     
                            7.        Application is disposed.                    
                                                (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH,  J.)         
              C.L. Dhakate