1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6614 OF 2004 IN SECOND APPEAL STAMP NO. 30707 OF 2003 1. Bhagwan S/o Kachru Salve Died-through-L.Rs 1A Gulab S/o Bhagwan Salve and others.. .. Applicants Versus 1. Ashru Dulba Salve and another .. .. Respondents Shri A. B. Munde, Advocate h/f Shri D. N. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the Applicants. CORAM : N. D. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 05TH DECEMBER, 2009. ORAL ORDER : 1. Heard Shri Munde, learned counsel holding for Shri D. N. Suryawanshi, learned counsel for the applicants. This is an application for condonation of delay of 32 days caused in filing the second appeal. The respondent No. 1 though served with the notice is absent today. 2. I have gone through the contents of the application. The reasons have been stated as to why there was delay of 32 days in 2 filing the second appeal. There was some communication gap between the counsel and the party who approached the counsel with instructions to file the appeal. After going through the application, it is seen that case is made out to condone the delay that there was sufficient cause for the said delay and same is not fatal Section 5 of the Limitation Act provides room for getting extension of limitation beyond the period of limitation although there is no words found as condonation of delay. At this stage no proof is called for, but satisfactory explanation would suffice the purpose. 3. The appeal is continuation of original proceeding like suit. The suit was in time, but in appeal or applications the provision is made for granting extension, if party so deserves giving benefit of that provision and as observed above, the civil application is allowed. The delay of 32 days is condoned. The civil application is disposed of accordingly. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] bsb/Dec. 09