1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 1617 of 2009 Shraddha v. Jagdish and anr -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr C.F. Bhagwani, Adv for applicant Mr K.D. Shukla, Adv for R-1 Mr A. Parihar, APP for R-2 Coram: A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 3rd August 2009 1. Heard Mr C.F. Bhagwani, learned counsel for applicant and Mr K.D. Shukla, learned counsel for respondent no.1. There is delay of 19 days in filing application seeking leave to appeal. 2. Learned counsel for applicant contends that delay caused in filing application seeking leave to appeal is not deliberate or intentional. He submits that Advocate engaged for applicant became Judge of the City Civil Court, Mumbai and the applicant was not aware of the impugned judgment and order. He placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s Sharmaji Textiles v. M/s Sandeep Traders and ors reported in 2009 All MR (Cri) 771. 3. Learned counsel for respondent no.1 contended that ignorance claimed by the applicant cannot be excused and the judgment cited by learned counsel for applicant is not applicable in the present case. 2 4. Applicant is a Credit Cooperative Society where public money is involved. It is no doubt true as laid down in M/s Sharmaji’s case (supra) that Court has to adopt liberal approach while dealing with the application made under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. In the light of facts stated in the application, it does not appear that delay caused is either deliberate or intentional. 5. Hence, application is allowed. Delay caused in filing application seeking leave to appeal is condoned subject to payment of costs of Rs. 250/- payable by applicant to non-applicant no.1. Judge. hsj