:1: :1: :1: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2418 OF 2007 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 8104 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s Orders Orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.V.A.Sugdare, adv for the petitioner. Mr.R.M.Patne, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 5. Mr.Dilip Bodake, Adv. for respondent nos, 6, 7, 9 to 17. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED: 26TH FEBRUARY, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. Lonand Gram Panchayat is before this court in writ jurisdiction, but, before it could argue the matter on merits, it noticed that the Respondent no.8 Balwant Laxman Kakade has expired. The petitioner-Panchayat therefore filed this Civil Application for bringing the heirs on record. :2: :2: :2: 2. The Application admittedly is barred by time. There is a delay of 5 years and 1 month. The Civil Application is opposed by the heirs of Defendant no.8 who has filed an Affidavit-in-reply. The contention is that Balwant Kakade expired on 30.3.2002. The petitioner-Panchayat has recorded his death in the Death Register on 2.4.2002. Therefore, it is inconceivable that the petitioner-Gram Panchayat is unaware of the death of the deceased Respondent. In such circumstances, there is a lapse of 5 years, 1 month and 29 days. This delay should not be condoned. More so, when there is no explanation. 2. I have perused the Civil Application and the reply. The petitioner-Panchayat has stated that the information of the death of Balwant Kakade was furnished to them on 9.7.2007. The death certificate was also forwarded alongwith the communication of that date. It may be true that the petitioner is a Panchayat but the steps remained to be taken, :3: :3: :3: insofar as, the prosecution of this Writ Petition is concerned. The necessary communication could not be made with the Advocate appearing for the Panchayat in this court. There is inadvertence but the delay is not deliberate or intentional. In such circumstances, the Civil Application deserves to be considered and granted. 3. I have perused this Civil Application and I am satisfied that in the facts peculiar to this case, the delay deserves to be condoned. Public interest need not suffer for the lapses on the part of the Panchayat. Civil Application is therefore made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) to (c). Amendment to be carried out within a period of 4 weeks from today. If there is no compliance with the order and the Amendment is not carried out, the Writ Petition to stand dismissed against the Respondent no.8. sd/- :4: :4: :4: *******