1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11994 OF 2011 ,In CRAST/25314/2011 SHANKAR GANPATRAO KULKARNI VERSUS THE STATE OF MAH AND ANR ... Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Ingale Vivekanand V. AGP for Respondents/State: Mr.VH Dighe. --- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 21st NOVEMBER, 2011. PER COURT : 1) Heard Mr.Ingle and learned AGP. There is delay of 1248 days in filing the CRA. It has occasioned, owing to dismissal of claim reference on 28.1.2008 by learned CJSD, Omerga. Reading the order, it is clear that the learned Judge observed that since 1997 the matter was pending for evidence of the claimant, neither the claimant nor his counsel has submitted any application permitting him to grant time to lead evidence and, therefore, the learned Judged has observed that the claimant is not interested in prosecuting the matter. 2) According to learned Counsel, the claimant/revision applicant could not attend the 2 matter as the brief was transferred from the court of CJSD, Osmanabad to the the court of CJSD, Omerga. 3) Learned AGP submits the CRA is not maintainable. However, since the very claim of the claimant is dismissed for want of prosecution, CRA would, certainly, be maintainable. 4) During the course of submissions, learned Counsel for the claimant/revision applicant submits that the revision applicant shall not claim interest for the period from the date of judgment dated 28.1.2008 till the revision is registered. Accepting this statement, delay of 1248 days, being sufficiently explained, the applicant was prevented under the circumstances to prosecute the matter, is condoned. CA for condonation of delay allowed as above. The revision application to comply other office objections, if any. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/