The Executive Engineer, Chaskaman Project Division v. Dadasaheb Jijaba Gavane And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Amk CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 587 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14809 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 589 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14790 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3169 OF 2014 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14728 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3179 OF 2014 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14749 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3181 OF 2014 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14768 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3183 OF 2014 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14765 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3185 OF 2014 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14761 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3187 OF 2014 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14758 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3191 OF 2014 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14840 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 591 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14792 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 593 OF 2015 1/5

FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14794 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 595 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14796 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 597 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14802 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 599 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14798 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 601 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14800 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 603 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14804 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 605 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14807 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 607 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14811 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 609 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14813 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 611 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14816 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 613 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14818 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 615 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14820 OF 2014 2/5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 617 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14822 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 619 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14824 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 621 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14826 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 623 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14828 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 625 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14830 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 627 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14836 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 629 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14832 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 631 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14838 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 633 OF 2015 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14834 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3175 OF 2014 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14740 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3177 OF 2014 FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 14745 OF 2014 3/5

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. D. D. Shinde for the Appellant.

Mr. Gaurav Potnis for the Respondent.

Mr. Makarand G. Patil, AGP for the State.

CORAM : DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.

DATE : 19 th SEPTEMBER, 2016.

P. C. :

1.

These applications are for condonation of delay in preferring First Appeal against the Judgment and Award dated 16.04.2013 passed by the District Judge, Pune. The delay is of the 275 days. The cause of the delay is attributed to the Advocate who appeared on behalf of the applicants. It is submitted that initially he has applied only for certified copy of the Award, he received the same, thereafter he came to know that the copy of th impugned Judgment was also necessary. Then, the application was made for the copy of the impugned Judgment and on the receipt of the same, the appeal is filed along with application for condonation of delay.

2.

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that having regard to the cause of the delay, the delay caused in the matter, though inordinate, needs to be condoned, for achieving substantial cause of justice.

4/5

3.

Though, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the application on the count that there is inordinate delay of 275 days, considering the reasons given for the same and in order to decide the matter on merits and having regard to the settled position of law that the Court should adopt the liberal approach while deciding application for condoning the delay, especially, when it is caused in preferring the First Appeal, which is a statutory right vested in the litigant and further having regard to the fact that the First Appeals preferred by the claimants challenging the amount of compensation are already admitted, the delay caused in preferring these instant appeals is condoned in the interest of justice.

4.

The applications are accordingly allowed and finally disposed of.

[DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.] 5/5