1 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1765 OF 2009 IN APPEAL (L) NO. 327 OF 2009 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 448 OF 2003 IN BIFR NO. 75 OF 1999 M/s. International Knitting Limited .. Appellant Vs. 1. The Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction and ors. .. Respondents Mr. A.M. Sethna i/by L.S. Shetty and Associates for appellant. Mrs. Aruna Pai for respondent no.8 – O.L. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. January 20, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard. 2. Appeal under Lodging No. 327 of 2009 has been filed belatedly and 2 hence this Notice of Motion for condonation of delay. The delay caused is of 202 days and we have perused the affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion. It has been pointed out that in Company Petition No. 448 of 2003 an ex parte order came to be passed on 15/10/2008 and only on 14/1/2009 the appellant-company received the notice from the Official Liquidator of this court and that is how the Company came to know about the order passed ex parte. Further delay from 14/1/2009 has also been explained by pointing out that the appellant along with its creditors i.e. the representatives of respondent nos.3 and 4 had attended the meeting held in the office of Official Liquidator on 2/2/2009, as directed and in the said meeting one time settlement was concluded with the said respondents. In these circumstances, we are satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown to condone the delay. 3. Hence the Notice of Motion is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI,J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE,J.)