( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4219 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4217 OF 2010 IN SECOND APPEAL (ST) NO. 7633 OF 2010 Nanhe Khan Ahmed Khan .. Applicant Versus Yaqoob Khan and others .. Respondents Mrs. A.N. Ansari, Advocate for the applicant. Shri P.N. Kalani, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 7. CORAM : P.R. BORKAR,J. DATED : 01.07.2010 P.C. :- 1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 1430 days in filing Second Appeal. The Second Appeal is directed against judgment and decree passed by the District Judge, Parbhani in Regular Civil Appeal No. 112 of 2003, decided on 17.01.2006. The appeal was allowed and the judgment and decree of the Trial Court was set aside and the original suit was decreed. The original plaintiff was declared owner of the suit property and original defendant ( 2 ) was directed to deliver possession. Being aggrieved thereby, the original defendant has filed the Second Appeal. 2. Two grounds mentioned in the application for condonation of delay are that the attempt for settlement was going on and therefore no Second Appeal was filed immediately. It is also said that wife of the applicant was ill and ultimately she died because of said illness and because of the death, the applicant could not file appeal. The death certificate shows that wife of the applicant died on 23.09.2009. This application for condonation of delay along with appeal was filed in this Court on 17.03.2010. We have to consider whether the delay from 17.01.2006 to 17.03.2010 is properly explained. 3. The respondents have filed their reply affidavit and they vehemently opposed the application. They stated that two execution petitions were filed. Earlier execution petition was bearing No. 99 of 2007 in which the applicant appeared on 11.01.2008. That petition came to be dismissed as all legal heirs of the respondent were not brought on record. Subsequently, second execution petition No. 15 of ( 3 ) 2009 was filed. The applicant was served with notice on 22.09.2009. He had appeared on 07.10.2009. He has filed application on 09.03.2010 for setting aside order of issuance of possession warrant. It is argued before this Court that the documents produced with the reply affidavit shows issuance of the possession warrant and the same was returned as house was locked. It is not case of the applicant that he was not aware of the execution proceedings. 4. From the documents produced with the reply affidavit it appears that atleast from September, 2009, it was clear that there was no possibility of settlement and second execution petition was filed. In September, 2009 when the wife of the applicant died. Copy of application Exh. 15 dated 09.03.2010 is filed with the reply affidavit whereby the present applicant made application to the executing Court for setting aside possession warrant as per order below Exh. 11 and time was sought for filing say. So, at least after September, 2009 there was no proper reason for not filing the Second Appeal. ( 4 ) 5. Not being satisfied with the reasons given and considering that it is a case of enormous delay, this application for condonation of delay is dismissed. 6. In view of dismissal of application for condonation of delay, the application for stay does not survive. The application for stay also stands disposed of. 7. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated. [P.R. BORKAR,J.] snk/2010/JUL10/ca4219.10