Sangita Manik Rathod And ANR v. M.S.R.T.C., Thr Div. Controller, M.S.R.T.C., Central Bus Stand, Aurangabad And ANR

1 915-CA-1235-2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 915 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1235 OF 2021 IN FAST/9502/2020 SANGITA MANIK RATHOD AND ANR

VERSUS

M.S.R.T.C., THR DIV. CONTROLLER, M.S.R.T.C., CENTRAL BUS STAND, AURANGABAD AND ANR ...

Advocate for Applicants : Mr P.C. Mayure Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 : Mr A.D. Wange CORAM : SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.

DATE : 10th March, 2022 PER COURT :

1.

It is an application for condonation of delay moved by the claimants. 2.

Heard Mr P.C. Mayure, learned counsel for the applicants/claimants and Mr A.D. Wange, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 3.

Mr A.D. Wange, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 strongly opposed to allow this application for condonation of delay. He submits that the reasons assigned by the applicants in the delay condonation application are neither sufficient nor strong. The application may be dismissed. 4.

Mr Mayure, learned counsel for the claimants submitted that the claimants have assigned sufficient reasons in the application for condonation of delay in para Nos. 3 to 6. The applicants/claimants could not arrange for the funds which is ultimately resulted in delay. There was no intentional delay on the part of the claimants.

2 915-CA-1235-2021 5.

Having regard to the submissions of both the sides and the reasons assigned in para Nos. 3 to 6 of the delay condonation application and in the interest of justice, it is necessary to allow this application.

ORDER

(I) The application is hereby allowed in terms of prayer clause (B). (II) The Registry to make scrutiny of the appeal as per procedure and thereafter it be numbered and placed before the Court for admission. (III) C.A. is disposed of.

( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) mta