IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CIVIL APLICATION NO.101 OF 2010 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. STAMP NO.20027/2009 Smt. Indubai w/o Pandurang Mandaokar ..vs.. Jagan Chintaman Hiwarkar & ors - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mrs. V.P.Thakre, advocate for applicant Shri Jachak advocate for R-1a, b & 3 CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : May 06, 2010 . Heard the learned counsel for the parties. It is not in dispute that the first appellate court passed the judgment on 9.3.2009. The applicant applied for grant of certified copy of the judgment on 26.3.2009. On 22.6.2009 the certified copy was secured by the appellant as the same was ready only on the previous day. Thereafter, it is the case of the applicant that the applicant being an old lady was not able to contact the counsel for filing of the second appeal, especially because she was suffering from serious ailment at the relevant time. It is the case of the applicant that she contacted the counsel on 11th and immediately the second appeal was prepared and filed before this court. Shri Jachak, the learned counsel for the respondents strongly opposes the prayer made in the civil application. It is stated by the learned counsel for the respondent that the delay is of 189 days and not 102 as stated as stated by the applicant. According to him, the applicant has not annexed the medical certificate to show that she was suffering from illness, after she received the certified copy of the judgment passed by the first appellate court on 22.6.2009. The learned counsel for the respondents relied on the judgments reported in 2009 (4) Mh. L. J. page 373 and 2007 (1) Mh.L.J. Page 807 to substantiate his submission that the application for condonation of delay was liable to be dismissed as no sufficient cause was stated in the application. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the application, the reply and the judgment of this court, it appears that there is sufficient cause for the applicant in belatedly approaching this court in filing the second appeal. The delay in filing the second appeal is of 102 days and not 189 days as stated by the respondent in the reply. The respondent while calculating the delay has not excluded the time required to obtain the certified copy and period of 90 days of limitation for filing the second appeal. Though there is no medical certificate annexed to the application, it clearly appears from the application that the applicant is an aged person and since she did not have any assistance from anybody for approaching the counsel at Nagpur, she was unable to contact the counsel due to her illness after the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment passed by the first appellate court. The delay in this case is not inordinate and is of 102 days. The judgment reported in 2007 (1) Mh.L.J. 807 can not be applied to the facts of this case as there was a delay of six months in filing the application in that case and the applicant had merely stated that the delay was unintentional and she could not move the court because of her poverty. Similarly the judgment reported in 2009 (4) Mh.L.J. 373 also cannot be applied to the facts of this case as the delay in that case was of 1336 days and the court observed that the applicant had failed to explain the delay of 1336 days in preferring the appeal. Such is not the case here. The delay of 102 days in filing the second appeal is sufficiently explained by the applicant. The civil application is therefore, allowed and the delay in filing the second appeal is condoned. Appeal may be listed for admission after vacation. JUDGE smp