The State Of Maharashtra (Through ... vs Shri. Chandrakant Yeshwant Jasud ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17863 Bom

                                                  8-CAF1702-2019INFAST4779-2019-DELAY.DOC

                                                                                     Santosh
                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                    CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1702 OF 2019
                                                    IN
                                    FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 4779 OF 2019
SANTOSH
SUBHASH               The State of Maharashtra & anr.                      ...Applicants/
KULKARNI                                                                       Appellants
Digitally signed by
SANTOSH SUBHASH
                                        Versus
KULKARNI
Date: 2021.12.23
                      Chandrakant Yeshwant Jasud & ors.                   ...Respondents
12:21:23 +0530

                      Mr. Y. Y. Dabake, AGP for the State/Applicants.
                      Mr. Jayesh Joshi, for the Respondents.

                                                   CORAM:       N. J. JAMADAR, J.

                                                   DATED :      22nd DECEMBER, 2021
                      PC:-

1. Heard Mr. Dabake, the learned AGP for the State and Mr.

Joshi, the learned Counsel for the respondents.

2. This application is preferred to condone the delay of 220

days in preferring the appeal against the judgment and award

dated 11th August, 2017, passed by the learned Civil Judge,

Senior Division, Raigad-Alibaug in LAR No.43 of 2009 (old LAR

No.122/2009).

3. The applicants have ascribed reasons in paragraphs 3 to 6

of the application. It seems that time was consumed in taking

the decision and pursuing the matter of filing appeal against the

impugned judgment and award. Having regard to the

impersonal nature of the Government machinery, some

8-CAF1702-2019INFAST4779-2019-DELAY.DOC

allowance is required to be given for the delay. In any event, the

delay does not appear to be intentional. Nor there is lack of

bona fide. Thus to advance the cause of substantive justice,

the application deserves to be allowed.

4. Hence, the following order:

:Order:

(i) The application stands allowed.

(ii) The delay in preferring the appeal stands condoned.

(iii) The appeal be registered.

The application stands disposed of.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.]