1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.12253 OF 2005 IN SECOND APPEAL ST.NO.21532 OF 2005 Dagadu Balu Kadam & 7 others Applicants Versus Chandrabhaga Dnyandeo Mhaske & another Respondents Mr.L.B.Palod, advocate for the applicants. . CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 10 th August, 2009. P.C.: 1 This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 382 days occurred in presenting Second Appeal. 2 After presentation of appeal, notice was directed to be served on the Respondents, however, it is reported that Respondent No.1 - original plaintiff is not served and she is not residing on the given address. Respondent No.2, though served, has not caused her appearance. In spite of presentation of appeal, applicant could not take steps to serve Respondent No.1. There are no justifiable grounds to condone delay. Explanation offered by applicant for approaching this Court belatedly is not acceptable. 3 In this view of the matter, Civil Application does not deserve 2 favourable consideration. Application seeking condonation of delay of 382 days occurred in presenting Second Appeal stands rejected. Consequently, appeal also does not survive and stand dismissed. Other Civil Applications do not survive and stand disposed of accordingly. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* adb/ca1225305