1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.: 13829 OF 2010 IN CIVIL REVN. APPLICATION [St] NO.: 28484 OF 2010 Shivraj S/o Bhagwanrao Deshmukh Versus Vaijanath S/o Bhujangappa Tamshete Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.: 13829 OF 2010 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION [St] NO.: 28484 OF 2010 *** Shivraj S/o Bhagwanrao Deshmukh Versus Vaijanath S/o Bhujangappa Tamshete *** Mr. V. R. Sonwalkar, Advocate for the Applicant. *** CORAM: K. U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED: 9th DECEMBER, 2010. 1. Heard Mr. Sonwalkar for the Revision Applicant. There is delay of 77 days in filing the civil revision application. Notice are issued pursuant to the order dated 19th November, 2010. No participation from the Respondent. Due to financial difficulties, the revision applicant could 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.: 13829 OF 2010 IN CIVIL REVN. APPLICATION [St] NO.: 28484 OF 2010 Shivraj S/o Bhagwanrao Deshmukh Versus Vaijanath S/o Bhujangappa Tamshete Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. not prosecute the matter in time to prefer the revision. Delay is not deliberate, sufficiently explained. The revision applicant feels that there is merit in his case, accompanied with a good ground to challenge the order impugned. Civil application is allowed. Delay condoned. [K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.] Dated:09/12/2010. ans/13829