(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 313 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 313 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 313 OF 2005 IN IN IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL (ST.) NO. 28637 OF 2005 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL (ST.) NO. 28637 OF 2005 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL (ST.) NO. 28637 OF 2005 Namdev Pandurang Panchal ...Applicant Versus Mumbai Municipal Corporation & Anr ...Respondents ..... Shri. K.R. Belose, counsel for Applicant. Shri. A.J. Bhor, counsel for Respondent No.1 Shri. Parimal K. Shroff with Mr. M. Mhambrey with Radhika Pinzara i/b Mr. Manoj Mhambrey for Respondent No.2. ..... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATED: 16TH DECEMBER, 2005 DATED: 16TH DECEMBER, 2005 DATED: 16TH DECEMBER, 2005 P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the Applicant, learned counsel for Respondent No.1 and the learned counsel for Respondent No.2. 3. By this Civil Application the applicant is seeking condonation of 38 days’ delay in filing the aforesaid Appeal. For the reasons stated in the (-2-) Civil Application, sufficient cause is made out. There is no case of inaction, negligence or want of bonafide. Civil Application is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Place the Appeal for admission on 16.01.2006. *****