Datta Vishnu Shikhare vs Vijay Ramchandra Gajmal And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2709 Bom

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                   929 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10368 OF 2019
                              IN SAST/6527/2019

                         DATTA VISHNU SHIKHARE
                                 VERSUS
               VIJAY RAMCHANDRA GAJMAL AND ANOTHER
                                    ...
                 Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Biradar R.D.
           Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr.Bhavthankar Vivek
                                     ...

                                    CORAM :   SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.
                                    DATE :    10-02-2021.

PER COURT :

1.      Present application has been filed for condonation of delay of 71
days caused in filing second appeal.


2.      The applicant is original plaintiff who had filed Regular Civil Suit
No.94 of 2010 before Civil Judge, Junior Division, Selu District
Parbhani for declaration. That came to be dismissed on 03-05-2014.
Thereafter, it appears that he challenged the said Judgment and
decree in Regular Civil Appeal No.66 of 2015 before learned Principal
District Judge, Parbhani. The appeal came to be dismissed on 14-09-
2018. Now he want to file second appeal, however there is delay of 71
days.


3.      The applicant submits that some delay was caused by him in
applying for the certified copies but, thereafter, he lost those copies
along with other papers. He again applied for the certified copies and




     ::: Uploaded on - 12/02/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 12/02/2021 21:33:41 :::
                                              2                               CA 10368-2019



thereby the delay has been caused.


4.       Learned         Advocate   Mr.   Bhavthankar       appearing         for     the
respondent No.1 strongly opposed the application. He submits that
no good ground has been shown for condoning the delay much less
it is sufficient.


5.       The plaintiff / applicant intends to canvas certain vital rights
which according to him he possess.                   As regards the delay is
concerned, he says that he applied earlier but lost the certified
copies and then he took time.                    This can be considered as a
reasonable ground by taking liberal view.


6.       The      inconvenience     caused    to    the   respondents          can     be
compensated in terms of money and, therefore, the present
application deserves to be allowed. Hence following order.


                                       ORDER

1) The application stands allowed and disposed of subject to deposit of cost of Rs.5000/- (five thousand) by the appellant in this Court on or before 03-03-2021.

2) After the amount is deposited, Registry to verify and register the second appeal. Thereafter the amount be disbursed to the respondent No.1 who is contesting.

(SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI) JUDGE

vjg/-