IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.906 OF 2008 PETITION NO.906 OF 2008 PETITION NO.906 OF 2008 Shri Muktaji Tulshiram Bhogade Since deceased his L/Rs Shri Laxman Muktaji Bhogade and others ..Petitioners V/s Smt. Lahanubai Jaiwanta Bhogade & Ors ..Respondents. Mr. V.B. Nighot for the petitioners None for the respondents CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.A. SAYED, J. : A.A. SAYED, J. : A.A. SAYED, J. DATE DATE DATE : 2ND JUNE, 2008 : 2ND JUNE, 2008 : 2ND JUNE, 2008 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners. 2. This petition is directed against the order dated 30th June, 2007 passed by the Ad-hoc District Judge, Pune, whereby the application of the petitioners for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal is dismissed. 3. The suit was decreed on 7th March, 2003 and the appeal was sought to be filed by the original appellant, after the period of two years and one month. In the meantime, original the Appellant died, and his heirs, who are the petitioners herein, are brought on :2: record. The only ground taken in the application by the orig. appellant to explain the delay was that he was not keeping well because of his illness. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has invited my attention to the medical certificate relied upon by the original Appellant and contended that the deceased was 95 years of age and because of his illness he could not file the appeal in time. 4. I have perused the medical certificate. The Medical certificate is of the year 2005 and reveals that the original appellant was examined on 30th April 2005. It appears that only when execution process commenced, the orig. appellant has awakened and has sought to file the appeal. Moreover, one of the sons of the deceased Appellant was also a party to the suit. 5. I have perused the impugned order and the material on record. I find that the learned Trial Court has considered the matter in its proper perspective and come to the conclusion that no sufficient cause has been made out to condone the delay. In my view, the finding of the learned Judge cannot be faulted and the impugned order does not :3: warrant any interference. 6. The petition is therefore, dismissed. (A.A. (A.A. (A.A. SAYED) SAYED) SAYED)