spb/- 1 nms4366-06.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4366 OF 2006 IN SUIT NO. 2564 OF 1993 Anil Devraj Sarad & Anr. ... Plaintiffs. . V/s. Arvind N. Mafatlal & Ors. ... Defendants. ----- Mr. S.C. Chandratre for the Plaintiffs. Mr. Rajan Jaykar for Defendant Nos.1,4,5,8 & 9. ----- CORAM : D. G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 11th AUGUST, 2011. P.C. : 1 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2 This Motion is taken out by the original plaintiffs for setting aside the order of dismissal of the suit in default passed on 12th October, 2006. 3 Under Article 122 of the Limitation Act, the period of limitation for making an application for setting aside an order of dismissal for default and restoration of the suit is 30 days from the date of dismissal. The Motion, therefore, could have been taken out by the plaintiffs on or before spb/- 2 nms4366-06.sxw 10th November, 2006. The present Motion has been filed on 14th December, 2006 and is barred by limitation. In the affidavit in support of the Motion, there is not a whisper of any reason for the delay. The typed Motion did not contain a prayer for condonation of the delay and the prayer for condonation is added by hand. However, in the affidavit in support of the Motion, the delay is not explained. The affidavit was sworn on 20th November, 2006 and yet Motion was not filed till 14th December, 2006. Assuming that there was a good cause for the delay upto the date of swearing of an affidavit on 20th November, 2006 further delay between 20th November, 2006 to 14th December, 2006 (i.e. the date on which the affidavit was sworn and the date on which the Motion was filed) is not at all explained. 4 Motion is dismissed as barred by limitation. [D.G. KARNIK, J.]