1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO: 827/2003 IN C.A. NO.44/2008 IN REJECTED FIRST APPEAL NO: 212/2008 (Sayyad Ishak s/o Sayyad Ibrahim vs. Mohd. Jaweed s/o Abdul Majjid and another) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram Court's or Judges Order appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. ................................................................................................................................... CORAM: A. P. BHANGALE , JJ. DATED: 17th April, 2009. *** 1. Heard Shri Shingane, holding for Shri P.A. Kadu, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr A R Godbole, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2. 2. By this Application, the applicant is seeking review of the order passed on 11th June, 2008 in Civil Application No.44/2008 in First Appeal (Rejected) No: 212/2008, whereby the prayer for condonation of delay of sixty days in filing the First Appeal, was rejected, for want of sufficient and reasonable cause for filing appeal beyond the period of limitation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the photostat Medical Certificate dated 2 25.10.2007, issued by Dr. R K Belsare, MSD (Ortho) from Amravati, which is couched in the following terms :- “This is to certify that Mr Sayyad Ishak Sayyad Ibrahim was injured in motor accident. He was under my treatment from 25.6.2007 to 28.8.2007 and again from 31.8.2007 to 25.10.2007 and was advised rest for 3 months.” 4. The original certificate was not produced before the Court. Even the photostat copy did not indicate that Mr.Sayyad Ishak Sayyad Ibrahim was advised ‘bed rest’. The certificate was about the advise of rest only. The certificate was issued on 25.10.2007 in respect of the incident which had taken place on 11.6.2004. In these peculiar facts and circumstances, the prayer for condoning the delay, was rejected. That being so, the contention in the Review Application do not make out any case for sufficient and reasonable cause to review the impugned order, which no doubt, was passed on merits of the matter. 3 5. For the reasons stated herein-above, the Miscellaneous Civil Application is rejected. JUDGE sahare