1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.505 OF 2009 IN APPEAL (L) NO.12 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2231 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.2832 OF 2006 Sunil Choudhari and Anr. .... Appellants V/s. Continuous Stationery Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. ..... Respondents WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO.507 OF 2009 IN APPEAL (L) NO.11 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2356 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.2832 OF 2006 Sunil Choudhari and Anr. .... Appellants V/s. Continuous Stationery Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. ..... Respondents WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO.508 OF 2009 IN APPEAL (L) NO.13 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.911 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.2832 OF 2006 Sunil Choudhari and Anr. .... Appellants V/s. Continuous Stationery Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. ..... Respondents 2 Mr.A.D.Yadav i/by Mr.D.R.Shah, for the appellants. Mr.V.V.Tulzapurkar, Sr.Advocate i/by M/s.Kanta & Co., for respondent No. 1. Mr.P.P.Chavan a/w Mr.S.Patil i/by Navdeep Vora & Associates for respondent No.2. Mr.Sumit Raghani i/by PDS Legal, for respondent No.3. CORAM :P.B.MAJMUDAR & R.C.CHAVAN, JJ. DATE : NOVEMBER 03, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Advocates appearing in the matter. 2. In each of these notices of motion, prayer is for condonation of delay of 22 days in filing the respective appeals. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the appellant was not well and he was taking medical treatment, for which medical certificates was produced along with the affidavit in support of the notice of motion. He therefore, submitted that the delay occurred in filing the appeals may be condoned. 3. It is submitted by Mr.Tulzapurkar, Sr.Advocate, that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is a consent order and therefore, the appeals are not maintainable. He further submitted that since the appellant agreed for passing of the said order, the learned Single Judge has not dealt with any arguments raised by both the sides and the 3 impugned order was passed in view of the consensus prevailing between the Advocates. 4. Prima facie we find some justification in the said argument as perusal of the impugned order also gives such indication. However, this question is kept open while considering the appeal when it is placed for admission before us. Unless delay in filing the appeal is condoned, we cannot examine the appeal on merits. In view of the same, the appellant has made out a case for condonation of delay. Accordingly, delay in filing each of these appeals is condoned. The notice of motion is allowed with no order as to costs. 5. Appeals may be placed for admission on 09-11-2009. ( R.C.CHAVAN, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J.)