1 C.A.No.6020/11 in W.P. No.6738/09. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6020 OF 2011. IN WRIT PETITION NO.6738 OF 2009. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr.G.K.Naik Thigle, advocate for the applicant. Mr.S.V.Adwant, advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr.R.K.Jadhavar, advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 07.09.2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The applicant has moved the present application for extension of time and modification of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.6738/2009, dated 16.2.2010. Vide the said order, this Court had directed the petitioner/present applicant to deposit an amount of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) in the trial Court within a period of four (4) weeks for referring the document to the Government hand writing expert. The said order was a conditional order. It is stated that if the said amount is not deposited, the order 2 C.A.No.6020/11 in W.P. No.6738/09. of dismissal of the application (Exh.65) shall stand confirmed. 3. The applicant did not deposit the said amount within stipulated period. As such, filed application before the trial Court Exh.18 for accepting the amount of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) after the stipulated period. The said application was allowed by trial Court. Aggrieved thereby, the present Respondents filed Writ Petition bearing W.P.No.831/2011. This Court vide order dated 15.4.2011, allowed the said Writ Petition and quashed the order passed by the trial Court below Exh.18. Thereafter, the applicant has moved the instant application for extension of time. 4. Mr.Adwant, leaned counsel for Respondent strenuously opposes the application on the ground that once the Writ Petition has been disposed of, the same can not be reopened by filing Misc. Application and the Court would not invoke its powers U/s 151 of the C.P.C. The learned counsel relies on the following judgments of the Apex Court : "(i) "State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Brahm Datt Sharma and another" reported in (1987) 2 Supreme Court Cases 179; (ii) "Delhi High Court and another Vs. Atul Kumar Sharma" reported in (2001) 9 Supreme Court Cases 108; (iii) "State of Haryana and others Vs. Babu Singh" reported in 2008 AIR SCW 7567". The learned counsel further contends that there is an abnormal 3 C.A.No.6020/11 in W.P. No.6738/09. delay in depositing the amount. The Respondents are put to hardship. 5. Mr.Thigle, learned counsel for the applicant submits that reasons have been stated in the application for not depositing the amount within the stipulated period. The reasons stated would show that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause for depositing the said amount within the stipulated period. Earlier there was an acute health problem of the applicant.'s advocate. Thereafter the father of the advocate of the applicant died who was also advocate in the Writ Petition. 6. With the assistance of the learned counsel, I have gone through the application and the various orders referred. No doubt, the Apex Court in the judgments referred supra has held that once the Writ Petition is finally disposed of, it would not be permissible to reopen the same by Misc. Application even by invoking Section 151 of the C.P.C. The present application is in the nature of application U/s 148 of the C.P.C. i.e. seeking enlargement of the time to deposit the amount as directed by this Court. The said provision is directory. There is delay on the part of the applicant in depositing the amount. The same is also explained. The substantive right of a party can not be set at naught on technical ground. 7. In view of the above, I am inclined to entertain the present 4 C.A.No.6020/11 in W.P. No.6738/09. application and allow the same. However, the applicant also deserves to be mulct for the delay that has been caused. It is submitted by Mr.Thigle, learned counsel that the amount of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) is already deposited with the trial Court. 8. In the result, I pass the following order : (i) The time granted by this Court vide order dated 16.2.2010 in W.P.No.6738/2009 is extended till 22.11.2010 i.e. the date when the applicant had deposited the amount. The same shall be deemed to be the compliance of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No. 6738/2009. However, the applicant shall pay costs of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) to the Respondents within a period of two (2) weeks from today. 9. The Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.07.09.2011. asp/office/Ca6020.11 5 C.A.No.6020/11 in W.P. No.6738/09.