Gayabai Bhaguram Yechwad And Otehrs v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

2025:BHC-AUG:1294 935 ca.10277.2018.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

935 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10277 OF 2018 IN FA/937/2017 GAYABAI BHAGURAM YECHWAD AND OTHERS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Suraj V. Gundre. AGP for Respondent / State : Mr. D. J. Patil. Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Ms. Chaitali Chaudhari Kutti. ...

CORAM :

SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.

DATE :

15th January, 2025.

P.C.:

.

Heard the learned counsel for both the sides. This is an application for condonation of delay of 258 days caused in filing this civil application.

Mr. D. J. Patil, learned AGP and Mrs. Chaitali Chaudhari Kutti, learned counsel for respondent No.2 strongly objected the application. They submit that there is no sufficient ground to condone the delay. It is lastly prayed to reject the application.

Perused the application. It appears that earlier Advocate Mr. Mahesh Patil died. He could not take steps to remove the office objections within time. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for nonremoval of office objections. This is sufficient ground to condone the

935 ca.10277.2018.odt delay caused in filing this application. The delay deserves to be condoned and the appeal deserves to be restored in the interest of justice.

Hence, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (B) and (C), subject to the condition of removing the office objections within two weeks from today.

If the office objections are not removed within the stipulated time, the application shall be deemed to be rejected without further reference to the Court.

[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] nga