← Library
Bombay High CourtCAS/460/2018

Shri.Ananda Pandurang Mokate (Deceased Thru Lrs) 1a) Smt.Vimal Ananda Mokate And Others v. Smt.Vastalla Shankar Lokare @ Sushila Pandurang Makote

2019-04-03Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sandeep Kashinath Shinde3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.460 OF 2018 IN SECOND APPEAL (ST) NO.7777 OF 2018 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.461 OF 2018 Shri Ananda Pandurang Mokate (Deceased thru LRS) 1A Smt. Vimal Ananda Mokate and Ors ... Applicants Vs Smt. Vastalla Shankar Lokare @ Sushila Pandurang Mokate & Ors.

... Respondents ...

Mr. Prajakt M. Arjunwadkar for the Applicants. CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.

DATE : 3 rd APRIL, 2019 P.C. :

Heard learned counsel for the applicants.

Applicants have preferred the appeal against the judgment and decree passed in the Regular Civil Appeal NO.43 of 2011 by the Additional District Judge, Ichalkaranji. Appeal is presented beyond the period of limitation and Shivgan 1/3

thus condonation of delay of 136 days is sought. Though the Respondent Nos.1,3,4 to 6 are served, they have not caused their appearances. Respondent No.2 is the deceased mother of the applicant/appellant no.1. It is contended that advocate who was representing the applicants/appellants in the First Appeal proceedings did not communicate and/or inform about the impugned decree to the present applicants/appellants. It is further contended that Applicant No.1(C) was keeping track of the present dispute in the Courts below. That the Applicant No.1(B) is not mentally stable. It is, therefore, contended that Applicant No.1(C) was in­charge of the proceedings on behalf of the applicants/appellants. However, due to his pre­engagement, he could not spare sufficient time.

Though the respondents are served, they have not caused their appearances and contention raised in paragraph 3 is not controverted.

That even otherwise, delay is of 136 days and the cause shown and pleaded in paragraph 3 is 'sufficient cause' for condoning Shivgan 2/3

the delay.

That for the reasons stated here­in­above, application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.) Shivgan 3/3