Vinayak Bhagwan Choudhary v. Tatyasaheb Haridas Choudhary And ORS

{1} ca11331-16 drp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11331 OF 2016 IN SECOND APPEAL STAMP NO.25171 OF 2016 Vinayak Bhagwan Choudhary APPLICANT

VERSUS

Tatyasaheb Haridas Choudnary and Others RESPONDENTS .......

Mr. Aniruddha A. Nimbalkar, Advocate for the applicant Ms. Sheetal Salunke h/f Mr. V. D. Salunke, Adv for respondents .......

[CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.] DATE : 9 th DECEMBER, 2016 ORDER :

1.

Heard learned advocate for the parties.

2.

Mr. Nimbalkar, learned advocate refers to the reasons as are contained in civil application.

3.

Learned advocate for the respondents purports to resist the application, however, is not in a position to challenge veracity of the contents in the application under which the delay is stated to have been caused. In any case, it will have to be considered that by causing delay, the applicant can be said to have hardly gained any benefit.

{2} ca11331-16 4.

In the circumstances, looking at the quantum of delay, which does not appear to be inordinate, it would be expedient to allow the application. As such, civil application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause "B" and is disposed of. [SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.] drp/ca11331-16