1 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CA NO.4243/2009 IN FA ST.NO.8016/2009. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.PN Sonpethkar, Adv. for applicant; Mr.SD Kaldate, AGP for Respondent No.1; Ms.Preeti Diggikar, Adv. for Resp.No.2. ___ CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 18 th March, 2010. ... 1) Heard learned Counsel for the appellant/applicant; Learned AGP waives service and appears for Respondent No.1. Counsel for Respondent No.2/CEO has opposed the application and lastly has said, if the Court inclines to condone the delay then it should be on payment of reasonable cost by the applicant. 2) The plaintiff/applicant herein filed a suit for recovery of Rs.5,00,000/- as damages as she felt that the family planning operation (Tubectomy), she underwent on 21.6.2001, has created an undesired and panic situation, as she has subsequently given birth to a female child – Anjana. 3) Considering the nature of the allegations and the poor financial plight of the plaintiff/appellant, she 2 could not arrange for necessary court fees, she had instructed the counsel to collect the papers, however, there is omission. The delay of 274 days is not deliberate, it warrants condonation and accordingly condoned, application allowed as above. 4) Learned AGP and learned Counsel for the respective parties waive service in the appeal. 5) Call R. and P. To be heard finally at admission stage on 18th June, 2010. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/ca4243.09