IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1082 OF 2007 IN APPEAL (ST) NO. 1047 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 323 OF 2004 Mahapalika Arogya Seva Karmachari Sanghatana, Mumbai .......Appellant V/S. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay & Ors. ......Respondents ------- Mr.Prakash Devdas,Advocate for appellant. Mr.P.M.Palshikar with Ms.T.H.Puranik, Advocate for respondents. CORAM : J.N.PATEL, & : SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, JJ. DATED : 14TH SEPTEMBER, 2009. P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The Notice of Motion is taken out by the appellant for condonation of delay of 49 days in filing the present Appeal. It is the case of the appellant in the affidavit-in-support of the Notice of Motion, that the impugned judgment and order came to be passed by the learned Single Judge on 26th September, 2006 and the Appeal has been filed on 14th December, 2006. It is submitted that the certified copy was made available to the appellant on 16th November 2006, though it was ready on 13th November, 2006. 3. In reply to this, it is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the reasons given for condonation of delay do not specify as to on what date the appellant applied for certified copy and why he has not collected the certified copy of the order and judgment on 13th November, 2006 and waited till 16th November, 2006, though it was ready on 13th November, 2006. Further, the calculation for period of limitation is also not correct, as the time starts running from the date the judgment and order is pronounced. In this case, the Writ Petition came to be dismissed on 26th September, 2006 which was well within the knowledge of the appellant. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant states that it appears that there is some misunderstanding in the matter and the fault lies on the part of the advocate for miscalculating the period within which the appeal was required to be preferred and the parties may not be made to suffer for such lapse. 5. Taking into consideration that the appeal is preferred by and on behalf of the Union, we are inclined to condone the delay in order to give a fair opportunity to the parties. Therefore, the Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The Appeal be registered and placed for admission in due course. [J.N.PATEL, J] [ SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J]