Shri Vinayak S/O Mahadeorao Raut And 3 Others v. Shri Kishor Santoshrao Gaikwad

1 / 2 07-CAO 1101.2019 +1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO. 1101 OF 2019 IN M.C.A. (ST.) 265 OF 2019 (REVIEW) Shekhar s/o Chandrabhanji Raut vs. Kishor Santoshrao Gaikwad WITH CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO. 1113 OF 2019 IN M.C.A. (ST.) 269 OF 2019 (REVIEW) Vinayak S/o Mahadeorao Raut and others vs. Shri Kishor Santoshrao Gaikwad ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court'

s orders Court'

s or Judge'

s Orders.

or directions and Registrar'

s orders.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A. R. Ingole, Advocate for applicants in both these applications.

Mr. Sahil Mate Advocate h/f. Mr. Nandesh Deshpande, Advocate for respondent in both these applications. CORAM :

MANISH PITALE J.

DATE : 29/04/2022 The applicants have filed an application for review along with application for condonation of delay in the context of order dated 09/12/2016 passed by this Court in Second Appeal Nos.418 of 2014 and 419 of 2014. Notice was issued in the said applications for condonation of delay. The KOLHE

2 / 2 07-CAO 1101.2019 +1 respondents have filed reply. The only reason given in these applications for condonation of delay of 727 days is that compromise talks were going on between the parties. In reply, the aforesaid claim made on behalf of the applicants is flatly denied. There is no other reason given in the application seeking condonation of delay. Therefore, this Court is not convinced that sufficient cause is shown for condonation of substantial delay of 727 days. 2.

Even otherwise this Court has perused the order dated 09/12/2016 passed by this Court, review of which is sought. It was found that no substantial question of law arose in the appeals filed by the applicants and accordingly, the Second Appeals were dismissed. The applicants were unable to demonstrate any error apparent on the face of record. 3.

In view of the above, the applications are dismissed.

JUDGE CHANDRAKANT KOLHE 18:39 KOLHE