Rameshwar Sattyanarayan Maniyar v. Nikita Chandrakant Mane ANR ORS

1 CA - 8098-2017+

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8098 OF 2017 IN FAST/16139/2017 (DELAY) RAMESHWAR SATTYANARAYAN MANIYAR

VERSUS

NIKITA CHANDRAKANT MANE ANR ORS.

WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7619 OF 2017 IN FAST/16146/2017 (DELAY) RAMESHWAR SATTYANARAYAN MANIYAR

VERSUS

NIKITA CHANDRAKANT MANE ANR ORS.

...

Mr. Manoj D. Shinde, Advocate for applicants in both applications Mr. L.H. Kawale, Advocate for respondents no. 1 to 3 and 5 in both applications Mr. S.R. Bagal, Advocate for respondent no. 6 in both applications ...

CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.

DATE : 08-03-2018 ORDER :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

Learned counsel for applicant refers to contents of the applications and submits that under the circumstances referred to therein, the delay has occurred and looking at the facts and circumstances, the same may receive its due and delay be accordingly condoned, which would subserve the interest of justice.

2 CA - 8098-2017+ 3.

On the other hand, learned counsel Mr. Bagal, who waives service for respondent no.6 in civil application no. 8098 of 2017 and Mr. Kawale, learned counsel for respondents no. 1 to 3 and 5, purport to resist the applications, however, are not in a position to challenge the veracity of the contents of the applications. 4.

In view of the same, it would be expedient to allow the applications by condoning delay. As such, civil applications are allowed in terms of prayer clauses (B), respectively, and are disposed of.

[SUNIL P. DESHMUKH] JUDGE arp/