FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS CA/11209/2009 STATE V/S DADABHAU & CA/11210/2009 STATE V/S TRIMBAK. 1. These are the Civil Applications for condonation of delay in filing the First Appeals. 2. Though the delay seems to be of more than five years, the decree was not prepared for almost four years by the trial Court. 3. Shri Joshi, learned Advocate for respondents, vehemently opposes the civil applications on the ground that no sufficient cause has been stated for condonation of delay. According to him, the delay caused is intentional one as applicants were not required to deposit the amount and that the delay caused cannot come within the expression 'sufficient cause'. 4. It is not disputed that though the judgment was delivered on 23.9.2003, the decree was prepared only in the month of April 2007. After the decree was ready, certified copy of the same was obtained and thereafter, it was referred to the various departments seeking an approval for filing the appeals. The delay caused is not on account of lapse on the part of the State. It is the fact that the decree was not prepared by the trial Court. 5. In the light of the same, Civil Applications are allowed. Delay is condoned. Place the First Appeals for admission on 24.11.2010. No order as to costs. Dt.19.11.2010 (S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.) akl