abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4929 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 22230 OF 2008 M.N.P. Plastics Pvt. Ltd. .. Applicant V/s Surya Inks & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.S.S. Patwardhan for the applicant. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 7TH OCTOBER 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. 2. This application is for condonation of delay of about 4 years in filing of appeal against the judgment and order dated 30th November 2004 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Islampur. 3. The applicant is a private limited company. Respondents nos.2 to 7 were the directors of the applicant company at the relevant time. A suit was - 2 - filed by respondent no.1 against the applicant for recovery of money and the same was decreed by an order dated 30th November 2004. It appears that thereafter the company appointed one Mr. Jitendra Dharu as a director on 18th August 2006. Thereafter the company has filed the appeal along with the application for condonation of delay. It is alleged that Mr.Dharu was not aware of the decree passed against the company and therefore the appeal could not be filed in time. The company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 is a separate legal person. The directors may come and go and may change from time to time. Change of directors is no ground for non-action by the company. It is worthy to note that the decree was passed on 30th November 2004 and respondents nos.2 to 7, who were directors on 30th November 2004, admittedly were in charge and control of the company till 18th August 2006. The company therefore could have filed the appeal within the period of limitation. When Mr.Dharu became the director, time for filing the appeal was already over and the appeal was barred by more than 1 1/2 years. Mr.Dharu therefore cannot take advantage of the fact that he has become director subsequently and pray for condonation of delay. 4. No other ground for condonation of delay has been made out. - 3 - 5. In my view, no sufficient ground for condonation of delay has been made out. In the circumstances, the application is dismissed summarily. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)