1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9142 OF 2005 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 13026 OF 2005 The State of Maharashtra ..Applicant (Orig.Resp.) VERSUS Govind Ram Walke died through L.Rs. Mahadeo Govind Walke & ors. ..Respondents (Claimants) ..... Shri K.J.Ghute Patil, AGP for the applicant Shri Y.V.Kakde, advocate for respondent no.1A to 1F. Respondent no.2 served absent. .... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 6th November, 2009 PER COURT : 1 Perused. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Taken up for final hearing with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. Heard respective counsel for the applicant. 2 2 The applicant has preferred the present application for condonation of delay of 120 days occurred in filing the accompanying First Appeal, challenging the judgment and award dated 15.12.2004 rendered by learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar, in L.A.R. No. 366 of 1992. 3 The applicant submits that the applicant applied for certified copies on 3.1.2005 and same were delibered to him on 14.1.2005 and thereafter the applicant submitted the proposal to the Law and Judiciary Department through District Government Pleader’s office, Ahmednagar. The proposal was received in the Government Pleader’s office on 13.4.2005. Thereafter the Government Pleader assigned the appeal for drafting to the Assistant Government Pleader on 19.4.2005. The concerned A.G.P. after going through the file, drafted appeal and as such delay was caused, which is not willful, deliberate or intentional, but same was caused because of the procedure followed by the State in filing the appeal. Hence, the applicant prayed that the delay be condoned in the interest of justice. 4 Learned counsel for respondent nos. 1a to 1f opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that the applicant has failed to explain the delay properly and satisfactory 3 and the present application is devoid of any substance and same be rejected. 5 Considering the averments in the present application, it appears that the applicant has explained the reasons for delay of 120 days caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal properly and satisfactorily and the delay occurred is not willful, intentional or deliberate and certainly not not inordinate and hence, same is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. 6 In the circumstances, present application deserves to be allowed and accordingly same stands allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ thereof and delay of 120 days caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal stands condoned. The accompanying First Appeal be registered and numbered accordingly. Rule is made absolute accordingly. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) dbm/ca9142.05