IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8657 OF 2009 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL (ST) NO. 16938 OF 2009 Ashok Sitaram Misal Versus The Returning Officer and another ... Smt. P.A. Rajput h/f Shri V.D.Salunke, Advocates for the applicant and Shri M.S.Karad h/f Shri S.S.Thombre, Advocates for respondents 2 to 7 and 10, Respondents 1,8,9,11 and 12 Served. ... CORAM : S.B.DESHMUKH & SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, JJ. Dated : 20.11.2009 PER COURT :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. Rule. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith. 3. The applicant has preferred this application for condonation of delay of 18 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently opposed the application on the ground that it does not bear the substance and it is devoid of merits. He prayed to reject the same. 5. Considering the contents of the application so also rival submissions of the parties, it is seen that the applicant has explained the reasons for delay 2 in paragraph No.4 of the application. The reasons are satisfactory. The delay does not appear to be willful, deliberate or inordinate. Hence, the same is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. 7. The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B). Delay of 64 days stands condoned. Letters Patent Appeal be registered and numbered accordingly. 8. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (SHRIHARI P.DAVARE,J.) (S.B.DESHMUKH,J.) ... akl