:1: :1: :1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 141 OF 2008 Jayant Balraj Batula ....Applicant V/s. Kumar Chaitanya Jayant Batula and anr. ....Respondents. ====== Ms.Iman K.Calcuttawala i/by.IKC Law Associates, advocate for the appellant. None for the Respondents. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.RANJANA DESAI, & SMT.RANJANA DESAI, & SMT.RANJANA DESAI, & SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, JJ. JJ. JJ. DATED: DATED: DATED: 24TH JUNE, 2008. 24TH JUNE, 2008. 24TH JUNE, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. On 30.4.2008, we had condoned the delay in filing Criminal Revision Application No.141 of 2008. However, inadvertently the order admitting the criminal revision applicaton was not passed. Hence, Criminal Revision Application No.141 of 2008 is admitted. (SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J) (SMT.RANJANA DESAI, J) :2: :2: :2: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 91 OF 2008 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL (ST) NO.8748 OF 2008 Jayant Balraj Batula ....Appellant (Orig.Respondent) V/s. Ranjita Jayant Batula ....Respondent (Orig.petitioner) ====== Ms.Iman K. Calcuttawala i/by.IKC Law Associates, Advocate for the Appellants. None for the Respondents. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.RANJANA DESAI, & SMT.RANJANA DESAI, & SMT.RANJANA DESAI, & SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, JJ. JJ. JJ. DATED: DATED: DATED: 24TH JUNE, 2008. 24TH JUNE, 2008. 24TH JUNE, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. On 30.4.2008, we had admitted the instant appeal. There was a delay of 570 days in filing the appeal. We were not informed about the delay. Civil application for condonation of delay was filed. However, our attention was not drawn by learned counsel for the appellant to the same. Hence, the civil :3: :3: :3: application was not disposed off. When the office informed us about this, we by our order dated 20.6.2008 recalled our order dated 30.4.2008, admitting the appeal. We also vacated the stay order passed by us and we directed that the tribunal be informed accordingly. We also directed that notice be issued to the advocate for the appellants. 2. Today learned counsel for the appellant is present. Learned counsel for the respondent is not present. Learned counsel for the appellant states that inadvertently delay was not brought to the notice of this court. She states that learned counsel for the respondent has informed her, that he has no objection, if the delay is condoned. Hence, for the reasons stated in the civil application, we condone the delay. 3. Civil Application is disposed off. :4: :4: :4: (SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J) (SMT.RANJANA DESAI, J)