Ulka Sunil Bhalerao v. Sunil Raghunath Bhalerao

( 1 ) ca11012.18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 919 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11012 OF 2018 IN FCAST/25280/2018 ULKA SUNIL BHALERAO

VERSUS

SUNIL RAGHUNATH BHALERAO Mr.Samadhan H. Jadhav, Advocate for the applicant Mr.Dhiraj Gupta, Advocate h/f Mr.R.V.Gore, Advocate for respondent CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH & S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.

DATE : 09-08-2019 P.C. :- .

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The application is heard with the consent of the parties. There is delay of 90 days in filing the family court appeal. Applicant refers to contents of application in paragraph No. 4 and states that in these circumstances delay has been explained satisfactorily. 3.

Though learned counsel for the respondent purports to resist, veracity of the contents of the application is not over come by production of any credible material. In the circumstances, having regard to the decisions in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs Ms. Katiji and others reported in AIR 1987 SC 1353 and in the case of Esha Bhattacharjee Vs Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy and others reported in (2013) 12

( 2 ) ca11012.18 Supreme Court Cases 649, we deem it expedient to condone the delay. Civil application accordingly is allowed in terms of prayer clause-B and the application is disposed of.

[S.M. GAVHANE, J.] [SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.] VishalK/ca11012.18