FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6677 OF 2007 IN CROSS OBJECTION NO.29053 OF 2007 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.378 OF 2001 ------------------------------------:---------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Court’s or Judge’s orders. coram, appearances, Court’s orders : or directions and Registrar’s : orders. : ------------------------------------:----------------------------------- Mr.S.S.Punde for the applicant. Mrs.Mulekar AGP for the State. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & D.B.BHOSALE, JJ CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & D.B.BHOSALE, JJ CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & D.B.BHOSALE, JJ DATED: 13TH AUGUST, 2008 DATED: 13TH AUGUST, 2008 DATED: 13TH AUGUST, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard Mr.Punde, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs.Mulekar, the learned A.G.P. for the State. 2. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the cross objection in filing First Appeal No.378 of 2001. 3. As per the office note the cross objection is beyond time by six years and four months and 14 days. The State has opposed this application by filing the affidavit in reply and submitted that no case has been made out to condone the delay of 2492 days. 4. There is no dispute that First Appeal No.378 of 2001 filed by the State challenge the award passed on 29.6.1996 by the learned Joint District Judge at Raigad in Land Acquisition Reference No.129 of 1989 has been admitted despite the fact that the same was also filed belatedly. Mr.Punde also stated that though there is no stay to the impugned award in First Appeal No.378 of 2001, the claimants have not yet received any amount as has been directed to be paid by the award dated 29.6.1996 over and above the amount received pursuant to the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer. The reason for condonation of delay advanced before us is poor financial condition. We are, therefore, satisfied that the delay caused in filing cross objections deserves to be condoned. 5. Hence the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Cross objection admitted and to be heard with First Appeal No.378 of 2001. (D.B.BHOSALE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.) (D.B.BHOSALE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.) (D.B.BHOSALE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)