1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 59. CA/13309/2009 In RC/858/2005 60. CA/13310/2009 In RC/857/2005 61. CA/13314/2009 In RC/851/2005 -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr.N.P.Bangar, Adv., for the applicant. Mr. D.V.Tele & Mr.V.D.Rakh, A.G.P., for the respondent State. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:22-2-2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard Mr. N.P.Bangar, Counsel, representing respective claimants/appellants. 2. There is delay of 1585 days in each of the appeal, for setting aside the order of dismissal recorded by the learned Registrar (Judicial) on 2nd August, 2005. The office note shows that the papers of First Appeals (Stamp) are destroyed. 2 3. There is no reply to the applications from the respondent State. 4. Though during the course of submissions, Mr.Bangar indicated to re-construct the papers of First Appeals (Stamp), if delay is condoned, however, the delay, being exorbitant and is not sufficiently explained in the applications, as the claimants submit that the applicants land has been acquired by the respondent State by compulsory acquisition, which has lost their main source of income, they were not even paid amount of compensation fixed by the Reference Court till 2009. This constrained them to move away from the village in search of employment and hence they could not be in touch with the Counsel nor could they deposit the amount of court fee. 5. Though these contentions are heart touching, however, the hard realities cannot be ignored. 3 Time to deposit the court fee was to expire on 30.7.2005. However, the claimants even did not make an application seeking any extension therein and, consequently, the learned Registrar was justified in rejecting the respective appeals by order dt.2nd August, 2005. The delay thereafter in getting the appeals restored, which is 4 years, 4 months and 12 days is not at all explained in the very applications. Applications dismissed. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/13309-09cagr