: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1387 OF 2009 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1033 OF 2009 Gautam Anupchand Shah & Anr. .. Applicants V/s. Parshottamdas Khiaram Popli .. Respondent Mr. Vaibhav Mehta and Ms. Deepti Mistry i/b. M/s. Vaibhav Mehta & Associates for the Applicants. Mr. N. Dinkar Rao for the Respondent. CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED : 24 TH NOVEMBER, 2009. P.C.: 1. This Civil Application has been filed for condoning the delay in preferring the Appeal from Order. According to the applicants, there is a delay of only one day. The learned Advocate for the respondent contends that the Civil Application has been filed in breach of the Order 41 Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure which requires the applicants to file a Civil Application for condoning the delay on the date when the Appeal from Order itself is filed. : 2 : 2. A similar contention raised before the Supreme Court has been decided by the Supreme Court in the case of State of M.P. & Anr. v/s. Pradeep Kumar & Anr., reported in (2000) 7 SCC 372. The Supreme Court on considering order 41 Rule 3(A)(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure has held that if the appellant subsequently files an application to condone the delay before the Appeal from Order is rejected, the same should be take up alongwith the Memo of Appeal. 3. In these circumstances, in my opinion and in view of the judgment relied on by the learned Advocate for the applicants, the delay must be condoned. Accordingly, the Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). 4. List the Appeal from Order for admission on 11th January, 2010. 5. The ad-interim order passed earlier to continue till then. .......