1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6094 OF 2009 Shaikh Mustaq Ahmed s/o John Mohammad ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ...Respondents ..... None for the petitioner. ..... CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J. DATED: 29TH JANUARY, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 This matter was called out for hearing on 18.9.2009, when none appeared for the petitioner, the matter was adjourned to 25.9.2009. Even on 25.9.2009 and thereafter also, the matter was adjournment from time to time i.e. on 25.9.2009, 5.10.2009, 7.12.2009 and on 7.1.2010. 2. Today also, when the matter is called out none appears for the petitioner. On perusal of the pleading in the petition it appears that the Co-operative Appellate Court has rejected the Misc. application No. 10 of 2009 below Exh.1, which was filed for condonation of delay in filing 2 the appeal. The Co-operative appellate court in the impugned order has recorded the reasons and held that the applicant was not prevented by sufficient cause to prefer an appeal. The impugned order further records that the delay has not been properly explained by the petitioner. There is delay of about six years in filing the appeal. On perusal of the pleadings and the grounds in the petition, I find that no case is made out to interfere in the impugned order. Moreover, the order, which was impugned before the Co-operative Appellate Court was arising out of money decree. Therefore, no interfere is warranted. Writ petition stands dismissed. Ad-interim relief, if any, stands vacated. ( S. S. SHINDE. J.) rlj/