Karbhari Kushaba Walve (D/H) v. Hanumanta Kushaba Walve (D/H)

Tapadia RR/B.70 1/3 CAS/760/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 760 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL (ST) NO.2942 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders.

Mr. M.R.Bohra i/b Mr. Sachindra B.

Shetye, Advocate for Applicants.

Mr. Rahul Vijay More, Advocate for Respondents No.2A to 2D and 3A to 3F.

Mr. Kamlakar Hanumanta Walverespondent no.1C present. CORAM: R.G.KETKAR, J.

DATE : 10/04/2015 PC:

1.

Heard Mr. M.R.Bhora, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Rahul More, learned counsel for respondents no.2A to 2D and 3A to 3F.

2.

This is an application for condonation of delay of 41 days in filing Second Appeal. Respondent no.1CKamlakar Hanumant Walve appeared in person and submitted that in the application the only ground made out out is that the applicants could not make

2/3 CAS/760/2014 financial arrangement for filing the Appeal. He submitted that the husband of applicant no.1-Shantabai Walve was working as police constable. Applicant no.1B Ku.Vasant Walve is gainfully employed. They are also in possession of agricultural land. In short, he submitted that the ground made out in the application for condonation of delay that the applicants could not make financial arrangement, is patently false. He submitted that since ground set out in the application is false, no case is made out for condoning the delay.

3.

I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

4.

As noted earlier, this is an application for condonation of delay of 45 days caused in filing the Appeal. Having regard to shortness of delay and having further due regard to the case - State of Nagaland Vs. Lipok AO, (2005) 3 SCC 752 wherein it is held by the Apex Court

3/3 CAS/760/2014 that what counts is not the length of the delay but the sufficiency of the cause and shortness of the delay is one of the circumstances to be taken into account in using the discretion, I am more than satisfied that the applicants have made out a case for condoning the delay.

Hence, Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs.

5.

Office is directed to register Appeal, if it is otherwise ready.

(R.G.KETKAR, J.)