1 IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE JURISDICTION JURISDICTION JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.412 OF 2008 NO.412 OF 2008 NO.412 OF 2008 Shri Shri Shri Amrut Bhikaso Patil Amrut Bhikaso Patil Amrut Bhikaso Patil ...... Petitioner Petitioner Petitioner vs vs vs Sambhavnath Sambhavnath Sambhavnath Nagari Nagari Nagari Sahalari Sahalari Sahalari Path Path Path Sanstha Sanstha Sanstha Mydt Karad & ors .. Respondents Mydt Karad & ors .. Respondents Mydt Karad & ors .. Respondents Mr.Dilip Mr.Dilip Mr.Dilip Bodake Bodake Bodake for Petitioner for Petitioner for Petitioner Mr.Dinesh Mr.Dinesh Mr.Dinesh Bhosale for Respondents Bhosale for Respondents Bhosale for Respondents CORAM CORAM CORAM : : : S.C.Dharmadhikari, J S.C.Dharmadhikari, J S.C.Dharmadhikari, J DATED DATED DATED : : : 7th February, 2008 7th February, 2008 7th February, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1.1.1. Heard Mr.Bodke appearing for the petitioner. Heard Mr.Bodke appearing for the petitioner. Heard Mr.Bodke appearing for the petitioner. 2.2.2. This is not a fit case for interference under This is not a fit case for interference under This is not a fit case for interference under Article Article Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The The The order under challenge is passed upon an order under challenge is passed upon an order under challenge is passed upon an application application application seeking condonation of delay in filing seeking condonation of delay in filing seeking condonation of delay in filing the the the revision application. The delay is revision application. The delay is revision application. The delay is satisfactorily satisfactorily satisfactorily explained in as much as the explained in as much as the explained in as much as the petitioner petitioner petitioner and respondent no. 1 society were and respondent no. 1 society were and respondent no. 1 society were engaged engaged engaged in litigation before the Cooperative Court in litigation before the Cooperative Court in litigation before the Cooperative Court and and and the Consumer Forum. Thereafter, the 1st the Consumer Forum. Thereafter, the 1st the Consumer Forum. Thereafter, the 1st respondent respondent respondent rightly expected the petitioner to come rightly expected the petitioner to come rightly expected the petitioner to come forward forward forward and pay up the dues. However, that having and pay up the dues. However, that having and pay up the dues. However, that having not not not being done, it was decided to file a revision being done, it was decided to file a revision being done, it was decided to file a revision application. application. application. The revision application has been The revision application has been The revision application has been filed filed filed after a delay of one year. That has been after a delay of one year. That has been after a delay of one year. That has been explained explained explained by referring to this litigation and also by referring to this litigation and also by referring to this litigation and also administrative administrative administrative exigencies exigencies exigencies and clearances for filing and clearances for filing and clearances for filing a Revision application. The delay has been rightly Revision application. The delay has been rightly Revision application. The delay has been rightly 2 condoned. condoned. condoned. There is no reason to interfere. There is no reason to interfere. There is no reason to interfere. Dismissed. Dismissed. Dismissed. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, (S.C.Dharmadhikari, (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J) J) J)