25. CA 5843­07.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION . 5843 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO OF IN ( ) . 27717 2006 FIRST APPEAL ST NO OF WITH . 5844 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO OF & The State of Maharashtra Anr .. Applicant Vs Kashinath Balbhim Wayachal .. Respondent . . . , Mr A R Patil AGP for the State . . . Mr R S Alange for the Respondent : CORAM . . , . A S OKA J : 31 , 2011. DATE st JANUARY . .: P C 1. . Heard learned AGP appearing for the applicant 2. 25 The order dated th 2008 March passed by this Court reads : thus "1. . Heard learned AGP for the applicants 2. Considering the averments made in the , application there is no explanation for the delay 22 , 2002 28 , 2006. from nd February to th July Learned AGP seeks time to file additional affidavit . in support of this application By way of , indulgence time is granted to file additional 1 25. CA 5843­07.doc 23 , 2008. affidavit till rd April 3. 25 , 2008." Stand over till th April 3. , In terms of the said order there is additional affidavit dated 10th 2008 . April filed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer Perusal of the said affidavit shows that there is no specific 22 explanation therein for delay between nd 2002 February to 28th 2006. July 4. 25 By order dated th 2008, March this Court found that there was no explanation for delay in the application for aforesaid . , , period Therefore by way of indulgence the additional . affidavit was permitted to be filed The additional affidavit . , 19 does not explain the delay In fact by order dated th 2008, December this Court again permitted the applicants to . , file a proper affidavit In terms of the said order proper . affidavit has not been filed 5. 4 207 There is no explanation for long delay of years and days . , . in preferring the appeal Application is accordingly rejected 6. . 5844 2007 Civil Application No of does not survive and the . same is disposed of [ . . , ] A S OKA J 2 25. CA 5843­07.doc 3