1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 845 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.3463 OF 2008 Assistant Engineering Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. ...Applicant. v. Chandrakant Maruti Zurunge ...Respondent. Ms.A.R.S.Baxi, adv. For the Applicant. Ms.Anjali S Uthale i/by Shri Shriram S. Uthale, advs. For the Respondent. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : 9th September , 2009 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the Parties. 2 This is an application for condonation of delay of 852 days in filing the appeal. Respondent had filed suit challenging the bills for recovery of Rs.2,98,510/- issued by the appellant. Suit was decreed on 7th May, 05. Appeal was filed on 19th March, 2008 with this application for condonation of delay. It appears that this application was prepared and sworn on 27th May, 2006. It was explained that almost immediately after the judgment was passed, on 9.5.2005 application for certified copy was made and the certified copy was ready on 11.7.05. Thereafter, as per the 2 office procedure before any appeal could be filed to the High Court, sanction was required to be taken from the superior officers like executive engineer, superintendent engineer, chief engineer and thereafter the law officers of the MSEB. After approval of each of these authorities, matter was referred to advocate to prefer an appeal and when the appeal was prepared, delay of 7 months was already caused. In the application, explanation was given for 7months delay. In the affidavit of one Sandip L. Pawar registered clerk of advocate Ms.Baxi for the appellant, it is explained that he had received papers on 5th May, 06 from Advocate Ms.Baxi for lodging the same in High Court. On the next date, he had also informed that he had lodged the appeal but infact he had not filed the appeal on that day. He explained that papers were misplaced and after search, they could be traced in the first week of February, 2008 and on 8.2.2008 appeal was filed alongwith the application. Thus, there was delay of 852 days in lodging appeal. 3 As far as delay of 6-7 months is concerned, that appears to be properly explained. However, explanation of the clerk for the advocate Ms.Baxi that the papers were misplaced by him even though he had told the advocate that appeal was lodged does not appear to be satisfactory. If that clerk would have been a public servant, departmental 3 action could be taken against him. However, he appears to be private registered clerk of the advocate. Anyhow, in my considered opinion, due to the fault of the clerk of the advocate, the appellant should not suffer. The appellant is after all public body and huge amount of Rs.3 lakh is involved in the litigation. 4 Therefore, in the public interest and in the interest of justice, this application is allowed and the delay is condoned subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited with the State Legal Aid authority within four weeks. If the cost is not deposited within the stipulated period, this application shall be deemed to have been rejected. 5 Application stands disposed off. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)