Allowed

The State of Maharashtra. v. Dagadu Sitaram Bhosle. and Others.

Bombay HC7 Jul 2010CA/4033/1997

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Bench granted conditional condonation of 1727 days delay in filing a First Appeal pending for nine years due to death of respondents and failure of most legal representatives to oppose. Ordered registration, fixed for admission, and required appellant to verify appeal is against L.A.R. No. 242/1986 before final admission.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 1727 days condoned; Application allowed subject to appellant verifying appeal is against L.A.R. No. 242/1986; Appeal to be registered and fixed for admission.

The State of Maharashtra. Vs Dagadu Sitaram… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CIVI APPLICATION NO. 4033/1997 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 3413/1996

¶5

Mr. S.N. Kendre, A.G.P. for applicant..

¶6

CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. Date : 7th July, 2010

¶7

PER COURT :

¶8

This application seeking condonation of delay caused in filing of First Appeal is pending since more than nine years. During pendency of this application, the original respondents No.1 and 2 both died. On record, now there are 13 legal representatives of the original respondents No.1 and 2. Out of them, except three, all are served. Mr. N.K. Kakde, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama for respondents No. 2.1 to 2.4. Despite service of notice on other respondents, other legal representatives of respondents No.1 and 2, they have not caused their appearance to oppose this application. Having regard to the long pendency of the application and failure of most of the served legal representatives of the respondents to oppose the application, I am of the view that remaining unserved respondents should not be pursued for the purpose of deciding this application. Shri Kakde who appears for respondents No.2.1 to 2.4, despite of his appearance, has not filed any reply to oppose the application.

¶9

The application seeks condonation of 1727 days. Having regard to the contents of the application, the application deserves to be allowed. The delay stands condoned. The appeal be

¶10

¶11

registered. The appeal be fixed for admission. There shall be no further notices to the respondents till the appeal is admitted.

¶12

Stand over to 21st July, 2010.

¶13

Heard on admission.

¶14

The appellant shall verify whether the appeal is filed against the judgment and award in L.A.R. No. 242/1986 which was decided by the II Jt. Civil Judge, (S.D.), Ahmednagar. This information shall be given to the Court on next date positively. There shall be no adjournment. If the appellant has not challenged the judgment and award in L.A.R. No. 242/1986, this appeal can not be admitted. The Registrar (Judicial) shall search the record and find out as to whether the appeal is filed against the judgment and award in L.A.R. No. 242/1986 decided by II Jt. Civil Judge, (S.D.), Ahmednagar.

¶15

6 Authenticated copy of this order duly signed by section officer of this court be supplied to the A.G.P..

¶16

[A.V. NIRGUDE, J.]

¶17

tsk/ca4033.97

The State of Maharashtra. v. Dagadu Sitaram Bhosle. and Others.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra. v. Dagadu Sitaram Bhosle. and Others.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratnabai Deorao Lakde and Ors. Vs Mahaboob Karimkhan Pathan and Ors.

Smt.Sonabai Dagdu Kamble and Ors. Vs Smt.Yamunabai Ramrao Ravte and Ors.

Bhimrao Annarao Kadam and Anr. Vs Baliram Shankar Kadam and Ors.

Vitthal Madhavrao Lahure Vs Atmaram Jairam Lahure and Ors.

Chandrakant Bansi Thorat Vs Rajabai Pandurang Kadam and Ors.

Sarojben Jaswantlal Shah Vs Sudhakar Devaji Mahajan and Ors.