1 IN THE HIGH COUT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5195 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 223 OF 2004 Rajaram Football Kadam ..... Applicant Vs. M/s. Gomtesh Construction & Earthmovers & ors.... Respondents Mr. D.V. Sutar Adv. for the applicant Mr. Amit Borkar Adv. For the respondent no.1. CORAM : R.G. KETKAR, J. DATE : 16th July, 2010. P.C. : 1. This application is for condonation of delay in filing the Civil Application and for recalling or order dated 29-1-2007 passed in F.A. No. 223/04. By order dated 24-6-2007 rule was issued in C.A. Notice issued to respondent no.2 was returned unserved with bailiff remarks “no such person is residing at the given address”. The C.A. was listed for orders on 9-4-2010 when time of four weeks was granted for taking steps for serving respondent no.2. It was further made clear that in case the respondent no.2 is not served, the C.A. shall stand dismissed against 2 respondent without further reference to the court. Office remarks indicates that applicant has not taken steps to serve respondent no.2 and hence application stands dismissed against respondent no.2. Learned counsel for the respondent states that the contest is between the applicant and the respondent no.1 herein. Considering the reasons given in the application, I am satisfied that the applicant has made sufficient cause for condoning the delay and for recalling the order dated 29-1-2007. Hence C.A. is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs. F.A. no.223 and C.A. no.547 are restored to file of this court. [R.G. KETKAR, J.]