1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3265 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 4957 OF 2009 Nivrutti s/o Nagshetty Kumdale ..Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & anr. ..Respondents ..... Shri R.P.Adgaonkar, advocate h/f Shri M.S.Patil, advocate for the applicant Shri B.J.Sonwane, AGP for the respondents ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 8th September, 2009 PER COURT : 1 Perused. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2 2 The applicant/appellant has preferred the present application for condonation of delay of 31 days in filing the accompanying First Appeal under Stamp No. 4957 of 2009 challenging the judgment and order dated 22.10.2008 rendered by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga, in L.A.R.No. 2588 of 2001 wherein the Reference Application came to be partly allowed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. 3 The applicant contends that after passing the afore said judgment and decree, the applicant applied for certified copies thereof and after receiving the certified copies, contacted the advocate at Aurangabad for filing the appeal. However, necessary funds were required for the legal expenses therefor, but due to illiteracy and poorness of the applicant, he could not arrange for the said funds within the period of limitation, which ultimately led to 31 days delay in filing the accompanying First Appeal. The applicant, therefore, prays that the delay caused in filing the appeal be condoned in the interest of justice. 4 Besides, the applicant submits that he has not received the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Reference Court since the date of filing of this appeal and, therefore, there was paucity of funds, which ultimately culminated into delay in 3 filing the appeal. 5 The applicant submits that the delay of 31 days occurred in filing First Appeal is not intentional, deliberate and willful and certainly not inordinate and, therefore, prayed that same be condoned in the interest of justice. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the time was spent in collecting the amount for expenses and the applicant has explained the delay properly and no prejudice would be caused to the respondent if the present application is allowed. 5 Learned A.G.P. for the respondents vehemently opposed the present application and submitted that the present application bears no substance and is devoid of any merits and same be rejected. 6 Considering the rival submissions and the reasons stated in para nos. 3 to 5 of the application, it appears that the delay of 31 days caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal does not appear to be willful, deliberate or intentional and is not inordinate and hence, same is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. Moreover, the applicant is sanguine of success in the accompanying First Appeal and, therefore, opportunity is 4 required to be given to the applicant to prosecute the accompanying First Appeal on its own merits. 7 In the circumstances, the Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause “B” thereof and 31 days delay caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal stands condoned. The accompanying First Appeal be registered and numbered accordingly. Civil Application stands disposed of. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) dbm/ca3265.09