Ashok Prabhuling Bhalwane v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14359/2017 IN CRAST/32116/2017 ASHOK PRABHULING BHALWANE
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS.
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14360/2017 IN CRAST/32118/2017 GAUTAM BABA KAWDE
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS.
WITH CIVIL APPLCIATION NO. 14361/2017 IN CRAST/32124/2017 SHESHERAO KALYANRAO CHEDE VERSUS.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS.
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14362/2017 IN CRAST/32128/2017 PANDIT KALYANRAO CHEDE AND ANOTHER VERSUS.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS.
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14363/2017 IN CRAST/32132/2017 MOHAN BABURAO KAWADE
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14364/2017 IN CRAST/32766/2017 CHANDRAKANT ANANDRAO CHEDE
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS.
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14365/2017 IN CRAST/32768/2017 1/3
SHRIKANT ANANDRAO CHEDE
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS.
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14366/2017 IN CRAST/32770/2017 SUWARNA BHAGWAN UNDARE
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Murge Estling S.. AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.S Dande.
CORAM
: K. L. WADANE, J.
DATE :
5th December, 2017 ORDER:
1.
These are the applications for condonation of delay caused in filing Civil Revision Applications. 2.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.P for the respondents/State.
3.
On perusal of the contents of the applications it appears that the applicants are residing near about 15 k.m away from Osmanabad City. The impugned order was not communicated to the applicants. In the month of June 2017 the applicants and their advocate approached to the office of respondent No. 1 and enquired about the status of reference filed by them. On enquiry the applicants came to know that their 2/3
applications came to be rejected on the ground of non payment of court-fees. Immediately thereafter the applicants applied for certified copies and same has been received. After collecting necessary documents they preferred the revision applications. In that process delay has been caused.
4.
Looking to the averments/grounds mentioned in the application and after hearing both the sides, I am satisfied that the delay caused for filing civil revision applications has been properly explained. The delay caused in filing civil revision applications is accidental and not intentional. Therefore, needs to be condoned. Accordingly it is condoned.
5.
Civil Applications are disposed of.
(K. L. WADANE, J.) mkd/- 3/3