: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.16 OF 2008 Harsha H. Modi ....Petitioner V/s. Vipul D. Doctor & Ors. ....Respondents Mr.H.S.S. Murthy for the Petitioner. Mr.Padgaonkar i/b Mr.P.M. Rustamkhan for Respondent No.1. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 10TH APRIL, 2008. P.C. : 1. Admit and heard finally. 2. There does appear to be a delay of 85 days in filing the appeal by the Petitioner. The Petitioner was apparently under the impression that as the stay granted in the decree was for a period of four months, it was not necessary to file the appeal within the stipulated period. 3. Possession has now been obtained by the landlord/Respondent by executing the decree. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, interest of justice would be served by permitting the : 2 : Petitioner to have the appeal heard on merits. Mr.Murthi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner agrees and undertakes not to make any application for possession till the appeal is finally heard and disposed of. The undertaking is accepted. 5. In the circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is directed to be heard on merits.