1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.224 OF 2006 Shri Milind Namdeo Phuge(Mali) ..Applicant. V/s. Sou Seema Milind Phuge(Mali) ..Respondent. Ms.Kavita Pawar for applicant. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J DATE : FEBRUARY 8, 2007. DATE : FEBRUARY 8, 2007. DATE : FEBRUARY 8, 2007. P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : 1. None appears. Dismissed for non-prosecution. 2. Later on Ms.Pawar, advocate for applicant appeared and mentioned the matter for restoration of the application as he was held up in some other court. For the reasons mentioned across the bar, request for recalling the order passed in morning session is accepted. Accordingly, application is restored to the file to its original number and heard immediately. 3. Heard counsel for the applicant. No interference is warranted against the discretionary order passed by the lower Court condoning delay in filing of the appeal. The argument that there was no 2 sufficient cause for condoning delay, does not commend to me. The Court below has recorded tangible reasons for accepting the case made out by the respondent for condoning the delay. Hence, dismissed.