1 H IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. C.A. No. 163 of 2010 In MCA (St) No. 20151 of 2005 Vikas Vitthal and anr v. Dadarao Shegokar -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr G.R. Sadar, Adv for appellant Mr N.R. Saboo, Adv for respdt Coram : A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 21.6.2010 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Applicant seeks condonation of delay of 54 days caused in filing review application. Learned counsel for respondents that judgment in second appeal was delivered on 13.9.2005 and review application is sworn in on 1.2.2010 and, therefore, there is inordinate delay and not the delay of merely 54 days. 2. Application for review was filed on 6.12.2005 and it appears that the application for condonation of delay has been filed later on. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant no.1 was ill from 29.9.2005 till 6.12.2005 and, therefore, review application could not be filed within the prescribed period of limitation. 3. Reason assigned by the applicant does not appear to be probable and credible. Another applicant was available to file review application and if really applicant no.1 was taken sick, there was no question of he being authorised to take necessary steps. Otherwise 2 also, affidavit in support of review application has not been filed and it is sought to be dispensed with. This Court by a reasoned order dismissed the second appeal on 13.9.2005 holding that no substantial question of law is made out by appellant. No purpose would be served by condoning the delay and then taking up review application for consideration. Application is liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed. Judge. Hsj