Narsing Sopan Suryawanshi v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

(1) C.A. Nos. 10227, 10228, 10229,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

Civil Application No. 10227 of 2014 (In First Appeal Stamp No. 20380 / 2014) Pralhad Shesherao Mane Died through L.R., Padminbai w/o. Pralhad Mane.

.. Applicant.

versus The State of Maharashtra, Through the Collector, Latur, & another.

.. Non-applicants.

.........................

With Civil Application No. 10228 of 2014 (In First Appeal Stamp No. 20397 / 2014) Shripati s/o. Ramaji Mane .. Applicant.

versus The State of Maharashtra, Through the Collector, Latur, & another.

.. Non-applicants.

.........................

With Civil Application No. 10229 of 2014 (In First Appeal Stamp No. 20410 / 2014) Babruwan s/o. Sopan Suryawanshi.

.. Applicant.

versus

(2) C.A. Nos. 10227, 10228, 10229, The State of Maharashtra, Through the Collector, Latur, & another.

.. Non-applicants.

.........................

With Civil Application No. 10230 of 2014 (In First Appeal Stamp No. 20401 / 2014) Narsing s/o. Sopan Suryawanshi .. Applicant.

versus The State of Maharashtra, Through the Collector, Latur, & another.

.. Non-applicants.

.........................

With Civil Application No. 10231 of 2014 (In First Appeal Stamp No. 20429 / 2014) Maroti s/o. Shankar Mane .. Applicant.

versus The State of Maharashtra, Through the Collector, Latur, & another.

.. Non-applicants.

.........................

Mr. V.G. Sakolkar, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. N.B. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader, for non-applicant nos.1 and 2.

(3) C.A. Nos. 10227, 10228, 10229, ..........................

CORAM : A.M. BADAR, J.

DATE : 16TH NOVEMBER 2015 PER COURT :

1.

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the non-applicants. 2.

Mr. Sakolkar, the learned Counsel for the applicants / original claimants submitted that the delay of 887 / 888 days in filing First Appeals was caused because of reasons beyond control of the applicants. He further submitted that he shall submit an undertaking to this Court, within a period of four weeks, to the effect that the claimants will not claim any statutory benefits for the period of delay.

3.

The learned Assistant Government Pleader opposed the Applications by contending that there are no sufficient reasons for condoning the delay.

4.

As averments made in the applications are not controverted by filing counter affidavit and as the learned Counsel for the applicants has shown his bona fide by submitting that the applicants will not claim any statutory benefits for the period of delay, the applications deserve to be allowed.

(4) C.A. Nos. 10227, 10228, 10229, 5.

Hence, I pass the following order :- (a) The Applications are allowed and the delay in filing the First Appeals is condoned.

(b) Appeals be registered and numbered.

6.

The Applications stand disposed of accordingly. ( A.M. BADAR ) JUDGE ................................

puranik / CA10227.14etc