1 c.a.1065.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1065 OF 2011 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2548 OF 2011 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 10500 OF 2010 [Sahebrao Motiralm Aarsule Vs. The State of Maharashtra and eight others] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr.Amit A.Mukhedkar,Advocate for applicant. Mr.D.R.Kale,AGP for respondent Nos.1 to 4 Mr.A.R.Nikam,Advocate for respondent Nos 5 and 6 ... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 7TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 PER COURT : . Heard learned counsel appearing applicant, learned AGP for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 5 and 6. Though, respondent Nos. 7 to 9 are served none appears for them. 2. Perused the contents of Civil Application. Learned counsel appearing for 2 c.a.1065.11 the applicant submits that during pendency of the revision before the Minister, Legal Representatives of respondent NO.7 were not brought on record, as a result applicant had no knowledge about death of respondent No.7. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant placed reliance on the reported judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ram Sumiran and others V. D.D.C. and others, reported in AIR 1985 S.C.606. In the facts of that case six years delay in bringing Legal Heirs of the deceased was condoned. 3. For the reasons stated in the application and submissions of the learned counsel for th applicant, I am convinced that delay in bringing legal heirs of the respondent No.7 required to be condoned. The application is allowed and same stands disposed of. 4. Learned counsel appearing for applicant to take necessary steps to amend the title clause and other appropriate steps which are required to be taken. Sd/- [S.S. SHINDE, J.] MTK