IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9427 OF 2009 Raghunath Tukaram Pawar & Ors. ..... ..... ...Petitioners V/s Kanchanganga Shreeniwas Bendere & Ors. ..... Respondents. Mr.Suganth B.Deshmukh, Adv. for the petitioners. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 11th November, 2009. PC: This petition question the legality and validity of order dated 23.6.09 passed by the District Judge-I, Karad rejecting the application moved by the petitioners/applicants seeking condonation of delay of 1365 days in preferring an appeal calling in question the judgment- debtor passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 6/70 decided by Civil Judge, J.D., Karad. The first appellate Court has in the facts of present case found that the petitioner-applicant has failed to establish sufficient cause for condonation of delay. The Court on the basis of evidence and material on record has categorically found that after death of the father of the petitioners they were brought on record as legal representatives and were also represented by an advocate. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners the petitioners did not contact the advocate for long period and as such were not aware of the passing of decree in the suit. Perusal of the impugned order further reveals that the petitioners tried to set out in correct factual position by leading evidence. However the evidence on record clearly establishes that the petitioners were aware of pendency of the suit, their father was also 1 represented by an advocate and they as well were being represented by an advocate. No just and proper reason is shown for condoning the inordinate delay of almost four years in filing an appeal. Perused the order. Same does not call for any interference, more so in exercise of writ jurisdiction as the order does not suffer from any illegality or impropriety. In the result writ petition is summarily dismissed. 11.11.2009. 2