1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA MCA No.306 of 2010 AND STA No.1213 of 2010 1. Shri Hemant Vinayak Shinkre & Ors. .. Applicants Versus 1. Shri Pandu K. Naik .. Respondent Ms. M. Conception, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. H. D. Naik, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM :- A. S. OKA, J. DATE : 18 th June, 2010. P.C. : Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. MCA No.306/2010 has been filed by the legal representatives of the deceased appellant for condonation of delay in making an application for setting aside abatement and for condonation of delay in bringing heirs of the deceased appellant on record. Application STA No.1213/2010 has been filed for bringing the legal representatives of the deceased appellant on record. There is delay of 7 years 4 months and 6 days. The explanation for delay in paragraph 2 of the application is that the legal representatives of the appellant were not aware of the 2 pendency of the appeal. Only when the appeal came up for final hearing and Advocate for the appellant tried to contact the deceased appellant that the applicants became aware of the pendency of the appeal. The application has been moved on 27th April, 2010. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent opposed the prayers. He has tendered affidavit of the respondent. In the said affidavit, it is contended that the appellant was represented by the constituted attorney before the Trial Court. The said constituted attorney deposed before the Trial Court on behalf of the deceased. It is pointed out that the applicants are represented by the same constituted attorney along with another constituted attorney as per the power of attorney executed on 24th April, 2010. It is, therefore, submitted that the constituted attorney of the applicants being also the attorney of the appellants, the said had knowledge of the pendency of the appeal. 3. I have considered the submissions. Perusal of the record of the First Appeal shows that the appeal has been preferred by the appellant himself and even vakalatnama has 3 been signed by the appellant. Merely because in April, 2010, the applicants appointed the same person as constituted attorney, it cannot be said that the applicants had knowledge of the pendency of the appeal. Hence, sufficient cause has been made out for condonation of delay and for setting aside abatement. Applications are allowed as prayed. Amendment to be carried out within three weeks. A. S. OKA, J. SMA