1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CA NO.3222/2009 IN FAST NO.5714 /2009 --------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr.P.B.Patil, Adv., for the applicant. Mr.J.R.Shah, Adv., for respondent/sole. ... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED : 11th JUNE, 2009 ... P.C.:- 1. Heard Counsel for the appellants. There is delay of 231 days in causing to file the appeal. Mr. J.R.Shah, Counsel appearing for respondents, opposed to entertain the application pointing that the grounds are not sufficient to condone delay. That apart, the subsequent changes made in the application, that fault lies with the Manager are not supported with any affidavit. 2. The delay in causing to file the first appal, apparently, is not deliberate. The appellant herein had financed and seized the truck in question which, by virtue of its rights, has been disposed of. The matter was to be decided at 2 various forums of the appellant, it being a Corporation. Consequently, the delay has occasioned. However, considering the difficulties faced by the original plaintiff respondent herein and since he feels having suffered financial losses, on the appellant paying costs of Rs.5,000/- to the sole respondent, the delay of 231 days is condoned. Application allowed. (K.U. CHANDIWAL), JUDGE agp/ca3222-09