1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. SECOND APPEAL NO.722 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6653 OF 2009 Abdul Karim S/o Shiakh Ibrahim ... Appellant VERSUS Baburao S/o Ramrao Chokhat ... Respondent Smt. A.N.Ansari, Advocate, for appellant Mr. S.J.Salunke,Advocate for respondent. CORAM: A.V.NIRGUDE,J. Date : 12th OCTOBER, 2009. PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The appellant challenges the impugned judgment and decree dated 12th February,2009 passed by the District Judge-3 Parbhani, rejecting the appellant’s application seeking condonation of delay of 14 months and 3 days in filing of First Appeal. The appellant was original defendant in the Suit bearing Regular Civil Suit No. 228 of 1998. The respondent sought declaration and perpetual injunction against the appellant in respect of the certain agricultural land. 2 3. The appellant opposed the suit by filing the written statement. But, thereafter, he did not attend the case. The appellant was not personally looking after the litigation. His son held his Power of Attorney. The Attorney also did not attend the case and the suit was decreed. The appellant stated that he went to Haj and after his return, he become ill, so he did not know the out-come of the suit. He said neither his Attorney was not looking after the litigation. On this ground, he sought condonation of delay. The learned District Judge rejected this story of the appellant and refused to condone the delay. 4. I am, however, inclined to condone the delay and allow the parties to have a round of litigation before the Learned District Judge Parbhani, who would decide the appeal on merits. The reasons for doing this is that, this suit is in respect of immovable property and it is better that it should be decide on merits. The appellant should be put to term for showing this leniency. On the appellants depositing Rs. 5000/- towards costs, in the First Appellate Court on or before 13th November,2009, the delay in filing the first appeal shall stands condoned and the learned District Judge, Parbhani shall decide the appeal on merits. If the costs is not deposited, as directed, this appeal stands dismissed without further reference to the Court. The amount of 3 costs deposited in the Court shall be paid to respondent. 5. In view of this, the Civil Application No. 6653 OF 2009 stands disposed of. (A.V.NIRGUDE,J.) MTK.SA.722.09 ok