( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1304 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1563 OF 2008 Shaikh Dada s/o Shaikh Ismail APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. A.S. Bajaj, advocate for the applicant. Mr. N.H. Borade, AGP for the State. Mr. Dhage, advocate for the respondent No. 6. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 2nd March, 2010] PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel and learned A.G.P. 2. Though the legal representatives were served, yet, no reply-affidavit is filed by the legal representatives of deceased respondent No. 7. 3. The death of respondent No. 7 was not informed to the Court as required under Order XXII Rule-10A of the Civil Procedure Code. The petitioner had no knowledge about death of the respondent No. 7. It appears that the delay was caused due to lack of knowledge and due to communication gap. Considering the explanation given, the delay is condoned. The abatement ( 2 ) stands set aside and the legal representatives of the respondent No. 7 are directed to be substituted in his place. The civil application is allowed accordingly. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/ca1304.09