( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION USJ CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1516 OF 2009 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1516 OF 2009 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1516 OF 2009 IN IN IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.)NO. 8119 OF 2009 FIRST APPEAL (ST.)NO. 8119 OF 2009 FIRST APPEAL (ST.)NO. 8119 OF 2009 M/s. Backward Classes Welfare Society ..Applicants V/s. Navjeevan Rahiwashi Sewa Sangh & Ors. ..Respondents ...... Mr. Ditendra Mishra for applicants Mr. H.N. Walawalkar for respondent No.1 ...... CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 8th April, 2009 DATED : 8th April, 2009 DATED : 8th April, 2009 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. The impugned order is dated 25th August, 2008. Application for certified copy is filed on 25th March, ( 2 ) 2009. In the application, nothing is stated as to when the applicants came to know about the impugned order even after the certified copy was issued on 26th March, 2009 and the first appeal came to be filed on 26th March, 2009. 2. Across the bar it is mentioned that learned advocate for the appellants at the stage of hearing of the notice of motion waived the service of the writ of summons and that is how the learned Trial Judge decided L.C. Suit No.2382 of 2002 treated that present appellant that is original defendant No.2 have been duly served. Hence, no fault can be found with the learned Trial Judge in deciding the suit. If present appellants have not participated in the trial, it was to their disadvantage. In the absence of specific reasons as to why the appellants filed application for certified copy after about 7 months it will have to be observed that the appellants have not explained the delay in the proper manner. In such a case, there is no question condoning the delay. 3. In the facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to saddle the appellants with the costs of this application. Hence, the following order : ( 3 ) ORDER ORDER ORDER . Rule on Civil Application is discharged. . Since the delay is not condoned, the application is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 4. After the aforesaid order is passed, learned advocate for the appellants stated that the appellants be permitted to withdraw the Civil Application with liberty to file proper application giving all the facts. It was open for the appellants to apply for withdrawal before request is rejected. 5. In view of the aforesaid order, Civil Application No.1517 of 2009 for the stay of the impugned judgment and decree stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y. GANOO, J.) (R.Y. GANOO, J.) (R.Y. GANOO, J.)