1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION 12409 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION 12410 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11639 OF 2008 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.176 OF 2003 Satawa Govinda Gaikwad-died Through L.Rs. 1-A) Kacharu S/o Satawa Gaikwad and others. ..Applicants V/s Gangadhar Arjun Jadhav-died, Through L.Rs. 1-A) Sopan Gangadhar Jadhav and others. ..Respondents ------------------------------------------------------ Mr.V.S. Bedre, Advocate for applicant. Mr.S.S. Shete, Advocate for respondent nos.1A to 1D. ------------------------------------------------------ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 26th November, 2009. PER COURT : 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. These are the applications for substitution of legal representatives of the deceased appellant. The applicants also seek condonation of delay. They would submit that the litigation was being looked after by 2 the deceased appellants i.e. Satwa and Dagdu. They had no knowledge about the pendency of the second appeal. They came to know about the pendency of the second appeal on 3rd November, 2009, when the second appeal was enlisted for final hearing and the Advocate informed them to attend the matter. 3. The Counsel for the respondent would submit that the pursis was filed on 14.03.2005 regarding the communication of death of the appellants. It appears that the Registrar (Judicial) by an order dated 21.06.2003 directed the abatement of the appeal in respect of the appellant no.1 due to non-substitution of the legal representatives. 4. What appears from the record is that the counsel for the appellants did not gather information about the death of the appellants till this appeal was enlisted for final hearing. The appellants died long back and the delay is enormous. Still, however, the legal representatives of the appellants can not be punished due to absence of communication about the pendency of the appeal. Considering the reasons stated 3 in the application, it proper to accept the explanation and condone the delay subject to costs of Rs.1500/- in each application. Both the applications therefore allowed subject to costs of Rs.1500/- to the Counsel for the respondents within a period of three weeks. If the costs are paid then the delay be deemed as condoned, abatement be deemed set aside and substitution of the legal representatives in place of the deceased appellants may be effected. Thereafter the Second appeal to be enlisted for final hearing without any delay and tentatively on 17th December, 2009. Civil Application No.11639/2008 is allowed accordingly. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE GAS/ca12409.09