1 W.P.No8748_2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8748 OF 2011 Tatya Namdev Pawar & Ors. ­­ PETITIONERS V/s. Sawantwadi Urban Co_op.Bank ltd. ­­ RESPONDENTS Mr. B.G. Tangsali, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. M.S. Karnik, for Respondent No.1. Mr. R.M. Patne, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.2 & 3. CORAM : G.S. GODBOLE, J. DATE : 17th NOVEMBER, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Tangsali, Advocate for Petitioners and Mr. Karnik for Respondent No.1. Mr. R.M. Patne, AGP appearing for Respondent Nos.2 & 3. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard by consent of parties. 2. By an order dated 30th April, 2010 passed U/s.100 of M.C.S. Act, 1960 read with Rule 85 of the M.C.S. Rules, 1961, the D.D.R. C.S., Sindhudurg transferred the ownership of immovable properties of the Petitioners to the Respondent No.1. In this proceeding the Petitioners were absent though they were apparently duly served with the notice. According to the Petitioners, they learnt about the said order only about 10 days prior to the filing of Revision Application and hence an application for condonation of delay was filed. That application was opposed and by the impugned Judgment and Order dated 5th May, 2011, 2 W.P.No8748_2011 the learned D.J.R., C.S., Kokan Division, Navi Mumbai has dismissed application for condonation of delay. 2. Mr. Tangsali submitted that the order of the D.D.R. is a drastic order which divests the Petitioners of their title to the immovable property which was valuable. He further submitted that since the petitioners were absent in the enquiry, they were not aware of the impugned order and learnt about the order 10 days prior to the filing of Revision Application. It was further submitted that the Petitioner No.1 was undergoing medical treatment in the month of June, 2010. 3. It is further submitted that there is nothing on record to indicate that the Petitioners were made aware about the order impugned in the revision application prior to the date of knowledge stated by them. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Karnik and Mr. Patne vehemently opposed the Writ Petition by contending that sufficient explanation for delay had not been given. It was also submitted that, the Petitioners cannot draw advantage from the fact that they had remained absent before the D.D.R., C.S., Sindhudurg. 3 W.P.No8748_2011 5. I have considered rival submissions. The delay was not enormous. By the order under challenge before the Divisional authority, the Petitioners had been deprived of their immovable property. There is no material on record to show that the Petitioners were ever served with the order dated 30th April, 2011 which was subject matter of the revision application. Considering the drastic nature of the order impugned, and considering the fact that the Petitioners had given plausible reasons for delay, the D.D.R. C.S., Kokan Division, Navi Mumbai ought to have been taken lenient view and the delay ought to have been condoned. 6. In my opinion, the Registrar has not exercised the jurisdiction vested in him by law on the basis of settled principles of law relating condonation of delay hence case for interference is made out. 7. Hence I pass the following order. a) The impugned Judgment and Order dated 5th May, 2011 passed by the learned D.J.R., C.S., Kokan Division, Navi Mumbai in Revision Application No.147 of 2010 thereby dismissing the application for condonation of delay in the said Revision Application (being Exh. ‘D’ 4 W.P.No8748_2011 to this Petition) is quashed and set aside. b) Delay in filing the Revision Application No.147 of 2010 is condoned and Revision Application is restored to its file. c) The Divisional Joint Registrar is directed to hear and decide the Revision Application on its own merits without being influenced by any observations made in the impugned order which is hereby set aside. d) The Registrar would bear in mind that the order impugned is not the order granting any recovery certificate and hence the Revision Application shall be entertained without insisting of any pre deposit as a condition for entertaining of Revision Application. ( G.S. GODBOLE, J.)