-1- bpk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 453 OF 2008 Shri Vilas Shiva Chavan (Beldar) and ors. : Appellants v/s Shri Shripati Chavan (Beldar ) and ors. : Respondents Shri S.V. Sadavarte advocate for appellants Coram : S.P. Davare, J. Date : 13.2.2009 P.C. . Perused. Heard learned counsel for the applicants. Nobody appears for respondent no. 8 who is contesting respondent as per the statement made by the learned counsel for the applicants. . It is the contention of the applicants that order was passed in RCF 61/03 by Civil Judge Jr. Division Panhala District Kolhapur on 28.2.2007 and thereby the plaint was directed to be returned to the plaintiff for presentation to the proper court. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the applicants had preferred writ petition no. 1424/08 before this court. However the hon’ble Shri Justice D.B. Bhosle passed an order there on 26.3.2008 and thereby permitted to withdraw the said writ petition to the petitioners in view of the objection in respect of maintainability thereof and granted liberty to the -2- petitioners to file AO against the impugned order. Accordingly the applicants have filed the annexing AO on 17.4.2008. However delay of 293 days occurred in filing annexing AO. . It is the contention of the applicant that applicants contested the proceeding of writ petition no. 1424/08 bonafidely which was subsequently withdrawn and as per liberty granted therein and annexing AO was filed which led to delay of 293 days in filing annexing AO. . Apparently, the delay occurred in filing annexing AO does not appear to be willful or intentional since the applicants were contesting the proceeding in writ petition no. 1424/08 bonafidely against the impugned order dt. 28.2.2007. Hence in view of section 14 of the Limitation Act the delay occurred in filing annexing AO is required to be condoned in the interest of justice to enable the applicants to avail the opportunity to prosecute the annexing AO on merits. Besides no prejudice would be caused to the respondent no. 8 if the said opportunity is given to the applicants. . In the circumstances present CA stands allowed -3- and delay of 293 days occurred in filing annexing AO stands condoned in the interest of justice and present CA stands disposed of accordingly. AO to be fixed for admission in due course. (S.P. Davare,J)