Dadasaheb Baba Shelke v. The State Of Mah And ANR

926delay.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD ...

926 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12325 OF 2012 WITH CA/12323/2012 WITH CA/12324/2012 IN FAST/19838/2012 RANGNATH ABAJI THOMBARE AND OTHERS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAH AND ANR ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Murge Estling S AGP for Respondents State: Mr. P. N. Kutti Puthenkulam ...

CORAM

: S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.

DATE :

9th October, 2015 PER COURT :

1.

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

2.

Learned counsel for the applicants states that the delay has been caused as the applicant, at the relevant time, could not arrange for the fund. The learned counsel states that the applicants would not claim statutory benefits for the delayed period in case the reference court enhances the compensation amount. 3.

Learned AGP states that there is inordinate delay. No sufficient cause is shown for the delay. 4.

The averments made in the applications are not 1/2

926delay.doc controverted by the respondents by filing any affidavit. The applicants shown bonafide by waiving statutory benefit for delayed period. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned. Civil application disposed of.

( S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ) JPC 2/2