1 C.R.A.183.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 183 OF 2011 [Hari Rambhaji Mhase Vs. Nanda W/o Hari Mhase] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr.L.V.Sangit,Advocate for applicant. CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 24TH AUGUST, 2011 PER COURT : . Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that without sufficient cause disclosed in the application by the respondent, the delay of 35 days caused in filing H.M. Petition No.104 of 2004 has been condoned by the Principal District Judge, Ahmednagar. According to the learned counsel appearing for applicant, the observation of the Principal District Judge, Ahmednagar that there is only two days delay, is contrary 2 C.R.A.183.11 to the record. Therefore, he submitted that petition requires consideration. 3. I have given due consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the applicant. In my opinion, taking overall view of the matter, the Court below has condoned the delay. Now, whether delay was of 35 days or two days is not a matter to be decided in the Civil Revision Application. The Court, which condoned the delay has jurisdiction to entertain the application for condonation of delay. That apart, the proceeding which is filed by the respondent-wife is in the nature of Hindu Marriage Petition. 4. In my opinion, no case is made out for interference Hence, Revision application stands rejected. Sd/- [S.S. SHINDE, J.] MTK