1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5964 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 10044 OF 2009 Shridhar s/o Shankarrao Jagade and others ..Applicants VERSUS Horticulture Officer, Tq. Fruit and Rop Watika, Parbhani and anr. ..Respondents ..... Shri Pawan Lakhotiya, advocate h/f Shri P.N.Kalani, advocate for the applicants Shri S.D.Kaldate, AGP for the respondents ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 8th September, 2009 PER COURT : 1 Perused. Heard learned counsel for the applicants. Leave to amend the days of delay in the application granted. 2 2 The applicants/appellants have preferred the present application for condonation of delay of 42 days in filing the accompanying First Appeal under Stamp No. 10044 of 2009 challenging the judgment and award dated 17.1.2009 passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division and Ex-Officio Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation at Parbhani in First Appeal No. 8 of 2008. 3 The learned counsel for the applicants submits that after passing of the afore said judgment and award on 17.1.2009, the applicants applied for the certified copies of the said judgment and award on 31.1.2009, the same were received on 5.2.2009 and therefore, the accompanying First Appeal should have been filed on or before 21.3.2009, but was filed on 5.5.2009 after delay of 42 dyas beyond the period of limitation. 4 The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have given the reasons for said delay in para 3 of the application and stated that the applicants are old aged persons and suffering from various health problems and, therefore, could not approach this court within the period of limitation. Moreover, it is further submitted that the applicants were under mental stress due to untimely death of their daughter and hence, the 3 delay was caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal. 5 The applicant further submits that the applicants have good case on merits. The applicants also submit that delay occurred in filing First Appeal is not intentional, deliberate and willful and certainly not inordinate and, therefore, prayed that same be condoned in the interest of justice. 6 Shri Kaldate, learned A.G.P. Opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that the present application bears no substance and same is devoid of any merits and, therefore, the same be rejected. 5 Considering the rival submissions and the averments made in the application, it appears that the delay of 42 days caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal does not appear to be willful, deliberate or intentional and is not inordinate and hence, same is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. Moreover, the applicants have hope of success in the accompanying First Appeal and, therefore, opportunity is required to be given to the applicants to prosecute the accompanying First Appeal on its own merits. 4 6 In the circumstances, the Civil Application is allowed as prayered and 42 days delay caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal stands condoned. The accompanying First Appeal be registered and numbered accordingly. Civil Application stands disposed of. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) dbm/ca5964.09