rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 574 OF 2007 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 574 OF 2007 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 574 OF 2007 IN IN IN APPEAL (L) NO. 979 OF 2006 APPEAL (L) NO. 979 OF 2006 APPEAL (L) NO. 979 OF 2006 IN IN IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1152 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 1152 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 1152 OF 2004 M/s. Haldyn Glass Ltd. .. Appellants. V/s. Perumal Velapandy & Anr. .. Respondents. Mr.V.P.Vaidya for Appellants. . Mr.R.D.Bhat for Respondent. . CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND ANOOP V.MOHTA, JJ. ANOOP V.MOHTA, JJ. ANOOP V.MOHTA, JJ. DATE : 11th DECEMBER, 2007. DATE : 11th DECEMBER, 2007. DATE : 11th DECEMBER, 2007. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- . Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellants and the learned Counsel for the Respondents. Perused the Notice of Motion and the affidavit in support thereof. For the reasons stated therein sufficient cause is made out for condoning 82 days delay in filing the above Appeal. There is no case of inaction, negligence or want of bonafide on the part of the Appellants. Hence, the Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)