1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.12982 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL ST NO.23702 OF 2008 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders Shri.G.V.Wani, Advocate for Applicants. Shri. Amit Deshpande,Advocate for respondent .... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 16TH JULY, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Mr.Wani,learned counsel appearing for the applicants raised following three points for condonation of 881 days delay in preferring the First Appeal. A] Parties had settled the matter. B] Amount in question was paid to 2 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders the respondent- Ori. plaintiff in full satisfaction of the claim. C] Due to health problem, the applicants could not attend hearing of the suit though written statement was filed. 3. The learned counsel submits that respondent-Original plaintiff had assured that suit would not be contested. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the reasons stated by the applicants in the application are not satisfactory to condone the delay and disputed the contentions raised by the applicants. 5. We have perused record. After considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, we find that the delay is abnormal one, and has not satisfactorily explained. 3 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders 7. In the light of the above, the grounds raised by the applicants for condonation of delay are not satisfactory to condone the delay. The Civil Application stands rejected. Sd/- Sd/- [K.K.TATED, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] MTK