2026:BHC-AS:34552 Diksha Rane 18 WP 2532 2026.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2532 OF 2026 NARI J KHUBCHANDANI THR POA DHANOTTAM V LONKAR ..PETITIONER VS MANOJ ISSARDAS ATHWANI & ORS ..RESPONDENTS Adv. S. S. Panchpor a/w. Adv. Mahima Sharma, Adv. Andil Parmeshwar for petitioner. Adv. Soumitra C. Jadhav for respondent nos.1 & 2. CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 19th AUGUST, 2026. Per Court : 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 2. Undisputedly, in the instant case, the notice of the application u/s.18(1) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act,1999, is served upon the present petitioner/respondent in the application, on 4th October 2024. He has filed his reply along with vakalatnama on 6th January 2025 i.e. within 94 days from the date of the service. Page 1 of 2 19th AUGUST, 2026 Diksha Rane 18 WP 2532 2026.docx 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that even applying the principle of Order VIII, Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, the time limit to file the same would be 30 days plus 60 days. In the instant case, the delay would be further of another three-four days. However, the Supreme Court has observed in the case of Atcom Technologies Limited vs. Y. A. Chunawala and Company reported in (2018) 6 SCC 639, that the delay can be condoned for sufficient reason and that other party can be compensated with cost.

4. Considering the delay being the minor, the delay is condoned subject to the payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited in the trial Court within a period of four weeks. 5. The petition stands disposed of. [ ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.] Page 2 of 2 19th AUGUST, 2026 Signed by: Diksha Rane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 21/08/2026 15:53:24

2026:BHC-AS:34552 Diksha Rane 18 WP 2532 2026.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2532 OF 2026 NARI J KHUBCHANDANI THR POA DHANOTTAM V LONKAR ..PETITIONER VS MANOJ ISSARDAS ATHWANI & ORS ..RESPONDENTS Adv. S. S. Panchpor a/w. Adv. Mahima Sharma, Adv. Andil Parmeshwar for petitioner. Adv. Soumitra C. Jadhav for respondent nos.1 & 2. CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 19th AUGUST, 2026. Per Court : 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 2. Undisputedly, in the instant case, the notice of the application u/s.18(1) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act,1999, is served upon the present petitioner/respondent in the application, on 4th October 2024. He has filed his reply along with vakalatnama on 6th January 2025 i.e. within 94 days from the date of the service. Page 1 of 2 19th AUGUST, 2026 Diksha Rane 18 WP 2532 2026.docx 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that even applying the principle of Order VIII, Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, the time limit to file the same would be 30 days plus 60 days. In the instant case, the delay would be further of another three-four days. However, the Supreme Court has observed in the case of Atcom Technologies Limited vs. Y. A. Chunawala and Company reported in (2018) 6 SCC 639, that the delay can be condoned for sufficient reason and that other party can be compensated with cost.

4. Considering the delay being the minor, the delay is condoned subject to the payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited in the trial Court within a period of four weeks. 5. The petition stands disposed of. [ ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.] Page 2 of 2 19th AUGUST, 2026 Signed by: Diksha Rane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 21/08/2026 15:53:24