1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.7113 OF 2006 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.13808 OF 2006 The State of Maharashtra ... APPLICANT VERSUS Smt. Antikabai w/o Dhondiram Kudke and others ... RESPONDENTS ----- Shri K.S. Patil, A.G.P. for the applicant Shri T.B. Bhosale, Advocate for respondent Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5 C.A. dismissed as against respondent No.3 ----- CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATED : 23rd February, 2010. ORAL ORDER : 1. Perused. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant for condonation of delay of 237 days caused in filing the 2 accompanying First Appeal challenging the judgment and award dated 11.7.2005, passed by learned VI Adhoc Additional District Judge, Beed in L.A.R. No.700/1999. 3. The applicant submits that, the impugned judgment and order was passed on 11.7.2005 and the applicant applied for certified copy on 12.7.2005 which was collected on 29.8.2005 and thereafter the proposal was submitted to Law & Judiciary Department for sanction through the office of Assistant Government Pleader and accordingly, the Law & Judiciary Department sanctioned the proposal and forwarded to the office of Government Pleader on 9.11.2005 and thereafter the Government Pleader assigned the First Appeal for drafting to the concerned Assistant Government Pleader on 11.11.2005 and thereafter the concerned Assistant Government Pleader, on going through through the file, drafted the appeal and time was consumed in the aforesaid process. Accordingly, the learned A.G.P. submitted that delay occurred in filing the accompanying First Appeal is not deliberate, intentional and willful and same was because of the reasons beyond the control of the applicant and, therefore, prayed that same be condoned in the interest of justice. 4. The learned counsel for the respondents opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that, the delay 3 caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal is excessive and exorbitant and as the applicant has failed to give satisfactory reasons for condonation of the said delay, and, therefore, submitted that the present application bears no substance and same is devoid of any merits and, therefore, same be rejected. 5. Considering the rival submissions, it is apparent that the applicant has put forth the reasons for condonation of delay which appear to be satisfactory. Moreover, it also appears that the delay caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal is not deliberate, intentional and willful and certainly it is not inordinate and, therefore, same is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. 6. In the result, present Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B) thereof and delay of 237 days caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal stands condoned and the accompanying First Appeal be registered and numbered accordingly. Rule made absolute in above terms. [SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.] fmp/ca7113.06