Appasaheb Pandharinath Shinde v. Chandrakalabai Damodhar Jadhav And Others

927-CA.17-25+1.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 927 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17 OF 2025 IN CRAST/28471/2024 APPASAHEB PANDHARINATH SHINDE

VERSUS

CHANDRAKALABAI DAMODHAR JADHAV AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Sharyu Dhanture h/f Mr. Gore Ravindra Vitthal.

Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. Hanumant P. Jadhav. ...

CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.

DATE : 09.04.2026 PER COURT :- 1.

Heard both sides.

2.

The applicant seeks to condone delay of 43 days in preferring Civil Revision Application. Office has reported that respondent No.11 is unserved.

3.

Respondent No.11 is not necessary party because revision is directed against the order refusing to reject the plaint. Application Exh.40 was not contested by respondent No.11.

4.

I find no malafides on the part of the applicant to approach this Court belatedly. It is conceded by learned

927-CA.17-25+1.odt counsel that applicant is ready to forego the interest and statutory benefits for the delayed period.

5.

For the reasons stated in the application, it is desirable to condone delay. The delay is condoned.

6.

Civil application for delay is allowed.

Civil Revision Application 7.

It is indicated that revision application shall be decided finally on the next date.

8.

Parties would be at liberty to file relevant documents required for inquiry under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC. 9.

Stand over to 09.06.2026.

(SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) ...

vmk/-