Chandrakant Balasaheb Shinde v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
935 FIRST APPEAL NO. 93 OF 2011 HARISCHANDRA SHAMRAO SHINDE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS ...
Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Pravin B. Rakhunde. AGP for Respondent / State : Mr. S. B. Jadhav. ...
AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6303 OF 2016 IN X-OBJST/12017/2016 ASHOK BALASAHEB SHINDE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Vivekanand V. Ingale. AGP for Respondent / State : Mr. S. B. Jadhav. ...
AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1300 OF 2013 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
VERSUS
ASHOK BALASAHEB SHINDE ...
Advocate for Appellant / State : Mr. S. B. Jadhav. Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Vivekanand V. Ingale. ...
AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1298 OF 2013 THE STATE OF MAH AND ANR
VERSUS
CHANDRAKANT BALASAHEB SHINDE ...
Advocate for Appellant / State : Mr. S. B. Jadhav. Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Vivekanand V. Ingale. ...
AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6311 OF 2016 IN X-OBJST/12019/2016 CHANDRAKANT BALASAHEB SHINDE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Vivekanand V. Ingale. AGP for Respondent / State : Mr. S. B. Jadhav. ...
AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 61 OF 2020 IN X-OBJST/12013/2016 IN FA/1299/2013 TUKARAM BHAGWAN SHINDE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Vivekanand V. Ingale. AGP for Respondent / State : Mr. S. B. Jadhav. CORAM :
SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE :
04th November, 2025.
P.C.:
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
Civil Application No.61 of 2020 is not on board. Mentioned. Taken on board.
Civil Application No.6303 of 2016 and Civil Application No.6311 of 2016 are filed for condonation of delay of 731 days caused in filing the first appeals and Civil Application No.61 of 2020 is filed for condonation of delay of 687 days caused in filing the first appeal.
The learned AGP strongly opposed the applications and submitted that there is no sufficient reason to condone the delay. On perusal of the applications, it appears that the delay has not been deliberately caused. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the delay deserves to be condoned on certain conditions. For the reasons stated in the applications, the delay stands condoned. The applications stand allowed in the interest of justice. It is made clear that in case the amount of compensation is enhanced, the appellants/applicants/claimants shall not be entitled for the amount of interest for the delayed period. List the appeals and cross-objections on 18th November, 2025. [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] nga