IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 842 of 2006 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER St.No.20675 of 2006 Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai .. Applicant versus M/s.Tarmat Infrastructural and Engg. Pvt. ltd. .. Respondent ... Mrs.Geeta Jogalekar for the applicant. Mr.Sanjeev P.Kadam i/b Prashant Jadhav for the respondent. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 1st December 2006 DATED : 1st December 2006 DATED : 1st December 2006 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the delay was caused on account of the delay in obtaining sanction of the Law Officer for filing of an appeal. In paragraph no.2 of the application, it is stated that the Law Officer’s sanction was obtained on 29th July 2006. The appeal has been filed on 1st September 2006. Even after obtaining the sanction of the Law Officer, there has been a delay of 32 days which has not been explained. There is not even a word in the civil application explaining the further delay after obtaining the sanction. 3. In the circumstances, civil application is dismissed. (D.G. KARNIK, J) (D.G. KARNIK, J) (D.G. KARNIK, J)