1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6012 OF 2006 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.12229 OF 2006 National Insurance Co. Ltd. ... APPLICANT VERSUS Sanjeevani w/o Shashikant Ghuge and others ... RESPONDENTS ----- Shri P.P. Bafna, Advocate for the applicant Shri B.R. Sontakke, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 ----- CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATED : 7th November, 2009. ORAL ORDER : 1. Perused. heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant (original respondent No.1) for condonation of delay of 121 days in filing the accompanying First Appeal, challenging the judgment and order dated 13.12.2005 rendered by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division & Ex- Officio Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act at Osmanabad in W.C.A. No.44/2003, awarding the compensation 2 amount of Rs.3,76,740/- and interest thereon to the original claimants i.e. respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein. 3. The applicant has stated the reasons for the delay caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal in paragraph Nos.2 to 9 of the present application and submitted that the delay occurred in filing the accompanying First Appeal is not deliberate, willful and intentional, but it is a bonafide delay and, therefore, requested that same be condoned in the interest of justice. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that the applicant has not furnished the details and particulars about the submission of application for certified copy, receipt of the certified copy and date of filing of the accompanying First Appeal etc. as well as the applicant has not accounted for the said delay. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that present application bears no substance and same is devoid of any merits and, therefore, same be rejected. 5. Considering the averments made in the present application and also considering the rival contentions, it is apparent that the applicant has put forth the reasons for the delay in paragraph Nos.2 to 9 of the present application and the said reasons appear to be satisfactory and accordingly, applicant has explained the delay 3 satisfactorily. Moreover, it is also matter of record that the judgment and award was passed on 13.12.2005 and applicant has applied for the certified copy on 15.12.2005 and, therefore, apparently the applicant has applied for the certified copy immediately. 6. Apart from the said position, it appears that the delay caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal is not deliberate, willful and intentional but same appears to be bonafide and hence, same is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. 7. In the circumstances, present application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B) thereof and 121 days delay caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal stands condoned and accompanying First Appeal under Stamp No.12229/2006 be registered and numbered accordingly. [ SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. fmp/ca6012.06