← Library
Bombay High CourtCA/6039/2018disposed offdismissed for default

Nabaji Yashwant Koradkar (Died) Thr Lrs Ankush And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra.

2019-04-15Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sunil K. Kotwal4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 33 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4180 OF 2018 IN FA/116/1994 BALIRAM MARUTI ANUSE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.

...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr.Nirmal Ramchandra J. AGP for Respondent Sole : Mr. S.P. Deshmukh ...

WITH 34 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5610 OF 2018 IN FA/113/1994 BAPU BABU BALE AND ANOTHER.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA .

...

Advocate for Applicants : Mr.Nirmal Ramchandra J. (consent not obtained) & Mr. G. K. Thigle AGP for Respondent Sole : Mr. A.M. Phule ...

WITH 35 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5611 OF 2018 IN FA/105/1994 BHIMA SUNDARBHAN SURVASE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.

...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr.Nirmal Ramchandra J. (consent not obtained) & Mr. G. K. Thigle AGP for Respondent Sole : Mr. R.B. Bagul ...

WITH 36 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5632 OF 2018

IN FA/115/1994 ANKUSH NABAJI KORADKAR AND ANR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicants : Mr.Nirmal Ramchandra J. (consent nt obtained) and Mr.G. K. Thigle AGP for Respondent Sole : Mr. S.P. Deshmukh ...

WITH 37 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6039 OF 2018 IN FA/110/1994 WITH CA/6040/2018 IN FA/110/1994 NABAJI YASHWANT KORADKAR (DIED) THR LRS ANKUSH AND ORS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.

...

Advocate for Applicants : MR.Nirmal Ramchandra J. AGP for Respondent Sole : Mr. A.M. Phule ...

CORAM : SUNIL K.KOTWAL, J.

DATE : 15 th APRIL, 2019 O R D E R :

Heard learned counsel for applicants and the learned AGP for respondents.

2.

The learned counsel for applicants has pointed out that the then Advocate of the applicants did not inform applicants, regarding dismissal of the appeal. The applicants were informed that the appeals

are still pending before the High Court. After getting knowledge of dismissal of the appeals, applicants immediately moved these applications for condonation of delay, as well as for restoration of First Appeal No. 116 of 1994 and other appeals. 3.

Learned AGP opposes these applications. In the alternate, the learned AGP submits that subject to waiver of statutory benefits, delay may be condoned.

4.

Considering the negligence on the part of the then Advocates of applicants, I hold that sufficient cause is assigned for condonation of delay.

5.

Delay in filing applications for restoration of appeals is condoned.

6.

First Appeal No. 116 of 1994 and others

appeals are restored to its original stages.

7.

Civil Applications are disposed of in terms of prayer clauses B and C.

[SUNIL K.KOTWAL, J.] mahajansb/