BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI
Order Reserved On: 01.02.2019
Date of Decision
: 25.02.2019
Misc. Application No. 16 of 2019
And
Appeal No. 10 of 2019
Santowin Corporation Limited
Shop No. 5, Concord CHS Ltd.,
N.S. Road No. 10, JVPD Scheme,
Mumbai- 400 049
…Appellant
Versus
BSE Limited
Phiroze Jeejeebhoy Towers,
Dalal Street,
Mumbai- 400 001
…Respondent
Ms. Prachi Pandya, Advocate with Ms. Vanessa Fernandes, Advocate i/b
Corporate Attorneys for the Appellant.
Mr. Tomu Francis, Advocate with Mr. Manish Chhangani and Mr. Arka
Saha, Advocates i/b Khaitan & Co. for the Respondent.
CORAM: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer
Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member
Per: Justice Tarun Agarwala
1.

For the reasons stated in Appeal No. 469 of 2018 the appeal is
maintainable.

2.

There is a delay of 83 days in filing the appeal. Having heard the
learned counsel for the parties, on this aspect we are of the opinion that
sufficient cause has been explained by the appellant which is adequate as
2
well as satisfactory and, therefore, we are of the opinion, that the delay of
83 days in filing the appeal should be condoned. The Supreme Court in
Ram Nath Sao alias Ram Nath Sahu & Ors. Vs. Gobardhan Sao & Ors.
(2002) 3 SCC 195 held that the expression “sufficient cause” should
receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no
negligence or inaction or want of bonafides is imputable to a party.
Consequently, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned and the
application for condonation of delay is allowed.

3.

List the appeal for admission on 28.02.2019.

Sd/Justice Tarun Agarwala
Presiding Officer
Sd/Dr. C.K.G. Nair
Member
25.02.2019
Prepared & Compared By: PK