1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2983 OF 2006 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 2620 OF 2006 The State of Maharashtra & anr. ...Applicants Orig. Respondents. VERSUS Pandurang s/o Tukaram Sontakke & ors. ...Respondents Orig. Claimants ..... Shri D.V.Tele, A.G.P. for the applicants/appellants Shri D.R.Jaybhar, advocate for respondents/original claimants ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 8th December, 2009 PER COURT : 1 Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By the consent of the learned respective counsel for the parties, the application is taken up for final hearing. 2 Perused. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2 3 The applicants/appellants have preferred the present application for condonation of delay of 199 days caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal, challenging the judgment and award dated 22.12.2004 passed by learned VIII Adhoc Additional District Judge, Beed, in L.A.R. No. 246 of 2000. 4 Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that the present application bears no substance and is devoid of any merit and same be rejected. 5 Considering the averments in the present application and after considering the rival contentions of the parties, it appears that the applicant has explained the reasons for delay of 199 days caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal in para nos. 2 and 3 of the application satisfactorily. Moreover, it also appears that the said delay occurred in filing the accompanying First Appeal is not deliberate, willful or intentional and, therefore, same is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. 6 In the result, present application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ thereof and delay of 199 days caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal stands condoned. Accompanying 3 First Appeal be registered and numbered accordingly. 7 Rule is made absolute accordingly. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) dbm/ca2983.06