1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.882 OF 2009 IN APPEAL (L) NO.134 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.968 OF 1986 Laxman Hariram Kukhereja .... Appellant V/s. Amrutlal Dwarkadas Sanghvi ..... Respondent Mr.Pradip R. Kadam, for the appellant. Mr.R.D.Vora, for the respondent. CORAM :P.B.MAJMUDAR & R.C.CHAVAN, JJ. DATE : NOVEMBER 03, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Advocates appearing in the matter. This notice of motion is taken out for condonation of delay of about 2 years and 208 days in filing the appeal. The case of the appellant is that the appellant has already filed a suit against the present respondent/original plaintiff, which is pending and the subsequent suit which is filed by the present respondent is in connection with the same transaction. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that written statement was not filed by the other side and therefore, the learned Single Judge passed an order under Order 8 Rule 10 of C.P.C., and the suit is 2 accordingly decreed. It is submitted that for interest of justice, delay in filing the appeal may be condoned and ultimately, suit may be allowed to be proceed on merits after allowing the present appellant to file written statement. 2. The learned counsel for the respondent states that though sufficient grounds have not been mentioned for condonation of delay, he has no objection if the delay in filing the appeal is condoned and the impugned order is set aside in case the appellant deposits entire decretal amount. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the stand taken by the learned counsel for the respondent, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. The notice of motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). No order as to costs. ( R.C.CHAVAN, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J.)