Laxman So Hanmant Gunepwar v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Collector Nanded And ORS

2024:BHC-AUG:29930 (1) 962-ca-6351-2023.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6351 OF 2024 IN SAST/8870/2024 LAXMAN SO HANMANT GUNEPWAR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR NANDED AND ORS ...

Mr. Shivsamb N. Janakwade, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. D. B. Bhange, AGP for Respondents-State.

...

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.

DATED : 13th DECEMBER, 2024.

P.C.:- 1.

Heard learned Advocate appearing for applicant. 2.

There is delay of 285 days in filing Second Appeal. The reason given is that applicant was not communicated about impugned order by his Advocate. Immediately on getting knowledge, necessary steps were taken.

3.

The contentions in the application are not controverted by respondent.

4.

In that view of the matter, case is made out to condone the delay. Hence, following order:

ORDER

a.

Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer Clause (B). b.

Delay of 285 days caused in filing Second Appeal is hereby condoned.

c.

Appeal be registered subject to removal of office objections. (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE Devendra/December-2024