1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.285 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.23592 OF 2003 The State of Maharashtra .... Applicant VERSUS Chandrasen S/o Shankarrao Mundhe & another .... Respondents ..... Shri D.V. Tele, AGP for the applicants. Shri S.J. Jadhavar, advocate for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 09th December, 2009 PER COURT : 1 Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. By consent takenup for final hearing. 2 Perused. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 3 The applicant has preferred the present application for condonation of delay of 171 days caused in filing the 2 accompanying First Appeal, challenging the judgment and award dated 04-12-2002 passed by learned 2nd Adhoc Additional Additional District Judge, Ambajogai, Dist. Beed in L.A.R. No. 2 of 1996. 4 Learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that the present application bears no substance and is devoid of any merit and same be rejected. 5 Considering the averments in the present application and after considering the rival contentions of the parties,it appears that the applicant has explained the reasons for delay caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal in para no. 2 thereof satisfactorily. Moreover, the said delay occurred in filing the accompanying First Appeal is not deliberate, willful or intentional and, therefore, same is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. 6 In the result, present application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘’ B” thereof and delay of 171 days caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal stands condoned. Accompanying First Appeal be registered and numbered and present application stands disposed of accordingly. 3 7 Rule made absolute in above terms. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) SDM* CA285.08