Aruna Uttam More And Others v. Satyabhama Santosh More And Another

CA 5633/15 in SAST 31670/14 - 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 929 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5633 OF 2015 IN SAST/31670/2014 ARUNA UTTAM MORE AND OTHERS

VERSUS

SATYABHAMA SANTOSH MORE AND ANOTHER ...

Advocate for Applicants : Shri Adgaonkar Ravibhushan P. Advocate for Respondent nos.1 & 2 : Shri Manoj D. Shinde CORAM: V.L. ACHLIYA, J.

DATE: 14.08.2019 PER COURT :

1] Heard learned counsel for the applicants and respondents.

2] This application is filed seeking condonation of 20 days delay in filing appeal.

3] In brief, it is the contention of learned counsel for the applicants that the delay caused in filing appeal was not deliberate and intentional. The delay was caused due to considerable time spent in collecting documents, seeking advice and then arranging funds to present appeal.

4] Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the application with contention that the cause assigned

CA 5633/15 in SAST 31670/14 - 2 - cannot be treated as sufficient cause so as to condone the delay.

5] On due consideration of the submissions advanced in the light of unchallenged pleadings, I am of the view that the delay deserves to be condoned. If delay is condoned, no serious prejudice would be caused to respondents as ultimately the appeal will be decided on its own merits.

6] Accordingly, the application is allowed. Delay condoned. Appeal be registered and placed for admission on 16.9.2019.

7] Shri Manoj Shinde Advocate waives notice before admission for respondent nos.1 & 2.

8] In order to explore the possibility of mutual settlement, the learned counsel for the parties are directed to keep the parties present on the next date of hearing.

9] S.O. to 16.9.2019.

(V.L. ACHLIYA, J.) ndk/c1481912.doc