Shri. Maruti Krushna Patil v. Shri. Vikas Janardan Kamble And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.7706 OF 2025 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO.27809 OF 2024 Shri. Maruti Krushna Patil .....Applicant Vs.

Shri. Vikas Janardan Kamble & Ors .....Respondents Mr. R. R. Kaddeshmukh with Mr. Vikrant Anand Desai, for the Applicant.

Mr. Bhushan S. Jadhav, with Ms. Siddheshwari R. Chavan, for Respondent Nos.1 to 5.

Mr. Rajvardhan S. Chougule, for Respondent Nos.21 to 25. CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.

DATED : 27th JANUARY 2026 P.C.:- 1.

The Applicant has filed the present Application seeking condonation of delay in filing the Civil Revision Application. There is a delay of 70 days in filing the Civil Revision Application. 2.

The learned counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is 72 years of age and is suffering from certain ailments. It is further submitted that due to weak financial condition and old age, the Applicant could not immediately approach his counsel and this Court, and therefore, the delay has occurred. It is 1/3

contended that the delay is not deliberate, and hence, prays for condonation of delay of 70 days.

3.

Mr. Bhushan S. Jadhav, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 opposed the Application and submitted that ignorance of law cannot be a ground for condonation of delay. It is contended that the delay of 70 days is deliberate and that economic condition cannot be considered as a valid ground. Reliance is placed on the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.8042 of 2013, wherein this Court did not accept the ground of economic condition and rejected the application for condonation of delay. 4.

I have considered the judgment relied upon by the Respondent. In the said case, the delay was of about three and a half years, whereas in the present case, the delay is only of 70 days. 5.

Considering the reasons assigned by the Applicant, the delay of 70 days in filing the Civil Revision Application is condoned. 6.

The Registry is directed to register the Civil Revision Application. The Interim Application stands allowed. 2/3

7.

Issue notice to Respondent Nos.17, 18 and 19, returnable on 17th February 2026.

8.

In addition to service by Court notice, the Petitioner shall be at liberty to serve the Respondents by any other alternate mode permissible under law and shall file an affidavit of service by the returnable date.

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) 3/3