1 22-cas-1325-2011.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY srj CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1325 OF 2011 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.550 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Nashik .. Applicant. V/s. Damodar M. Lahamange (since deceased) through his Legal Heirs & Others .. Respondents. Ms. V. S. Mhaispurkar, AGP, for the Applicant. Mr. R. M. Hardas i/b. Mr. P. N. Joshi, for Respondent Nos.1A, 1B & 1E. CORAM : G.S.GODBOLE, J. DATE : 5th OCTOBER, 2011. P.C.: 1 Heard Ms. Mhaispurkar. This Civil Application is filed for condonation of delay in filing application for setting aside the order of abatement of the Second Appeal as against Respondent No.1H – Sau. Jayshree Mohan Bhandage and bringing her heir on record. Perusal of the record shows that Regular Civil Suit No.857 of 1990 had been filed by late Damodar M. Lahamange against Appellant and on account of his death 2 22-cas-1325-2011.sxw during pendency of the said suit, said Jayshree M. Bhandage was brought on record as one of his heir as Plaintiff No.1H. She has died on 28th July, 1999 prior to the Judgment of the Trial Court by which the suit was dismissed on 16th June, 2000. The Appeal filed by the Original Plaintiff has been allowed by the impugned Judgment and Order and the suit is partly decreed. In view of this and in view of the fact that the Respondent No.1-H had died during pendency of the suit, there is no question of any delay in filing Civil Application for abatement. Hence, this Civil Application is not maintainable. 2 However, I have perused the Judgment of the Trial Court and the District Court, considering the nature of the relief claimed and the decree passed therein, it is clear that despite of the death of the Respondent No.1-H, the entire suit will not abate. Hence, this Civil Application is not maintainable and the same is disposed off with the aforesaid clarification. (G.S.GODBOLE, J.)