← Library
Bombay High CourtCA/10167/2021delay condonatedrejected

Sangram Babarao Bembde (Died) Thr Lrs Gayabai And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

2022-07-07Hon'Ble Shri Justice Anil L. Pansare4 pages

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 911 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10167 OF 2021 IN FAST/36620/2019 WITH CA/10168/2021 IN FAST/38012/2019 SANGRAM BABARAO BEMBDE (DIED) THR LRS GAYABAI AND ORS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR AND 912 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10189 OF 2021 IN FAST/33456/2019 WITH CA/10198/2021 IN FAST/33857/2019 WITH CA/10193/2021 IN FAST/33860/2019 WITH CA/10196/2021 IN FAST/33855/2019 WITH CA/10190/2021 IN FAST/33864/2019 WITH CA/10192/2021 IN FAST/33866/2019 WITH CA/10194/2021 IN FAST/33868/2019 WITH CA/10199/2021 IN FAST/33851/2019 MOHAMMED GULABSHEB SAYYAD

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR AND 913 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10227 OF 2021 IN FAST/34871/2019 WITH CA/10232/2021 IN FAST/35260/2019 WITH CA/10234/2021 IN FAST/35257/2019 WITH CA/10231/2021 IN FAST/35264/2019 TULSHIRAM BHAGWANRAO SAVRGAVE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR AND 914 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10257 OF 2021 IN FAST/36614/2019 WITH CA/10265/2021 IN FAST/38005/2019 WITH CA/10261/2021 IN FAST/38010/2019

(2) WITH CA/10264/2021 IN FAST/38008/2019 NARAYAN ABAJI KHIDSE (DIED) THR LRS NAMDEO AND ORS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR Mr. Shrikant B. Madde, Advocate for the applicants Mr. S. P. Tiwari, AGP for the respondents/State CORAM:ANIL L. PANSARE, J.

DATE:07th July, 2022 P. C.

1.

Heard.

2.

The learned Advocate for the applicants submits that in the identical matters arising out of the same notification and same award, the court has condoned the delay and admitted the appeals. 3.

The applicants are seeking condonation of delay in filing the first appeal. The applicants are ready to forego the claim of statutory interest for the period of delay as a condition

(3) for its condonation.

4.

The learned AGP opposed the application and submits that there is inordinate delay and the same has not been properly explained.

5.

The non-applicants have not attributed mala fides to the applicants in filing belated appeals. It appears that in identical matters, the delay has been condoned. Accordingly, for the reasons assigned in the applications for condonation of delay and to advance the cause of substantive justice, the delay deserves to be condoned.

6.

Hence, the following order:- a] The applications stand allowed in terms of prayer clause (B) with a raider that the applicants shall not be entitled

(4) for the claim of the interest for the delayed period.

b] The delay in preferring the appeals stands condoned.

c] Appeal be registered.

d] Thereafter, issue notice to the respondents, returnable after two weeks.

Learned AGP waives service of notice on behalf of respondents/State.

e] Call R & P.

[ANIL L. PANSARE, J.] VishalK/ca10167.22