ash 1 caf-2801.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2801 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.11596 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders. Shri Rajesh Choudhari i/by M/s. PDS Associates for the Applicant. Shri A.A. Garge for the Respondents. -- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 20TH JULY, 2011 P.C.: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. The Applicant preferred an appeal under Section 406 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane. On 17th February, 2009, the learned Trial Judge rejected the said appeal which was filed along with an application for condonation of delay. Thereafter, a miscellaneous application was taken out by the applicant for restoration of the appeal and the application for ash 2 caf-2801.11 condonation of delay. The said miscellaneous application has been dismissed by an order dated 29th October, 2010. 3. An Appeal is a creation of statute. Against both the aforesaid orders, no appeal is maintainable before this Court. Under Section 411 of the said Act of 1949, an appeal lies to the District Court from any decision of a judge in an Appeal under Section 406 of the said Act of 1949 by which a rateable value in excess of Rs.2,000/- is fixed. 4. Suffice it to say that the First Appeal in this Court is not maintainable. Hence, the application for condonation of delay cannot be entertained. The Application is accordingly rejected by keeping the remedy of the Applicant open to challenge the order by filing an appropriate proceedings. (A.S.OKA, J)