1 I N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR C.A. NO. 7966/08 (In S. A. St. No. 11076 OF 2008) Laxmi wd/o Keshavrao Bhoyar (dead thr. Lrs.) v. Asha w/o Gopichand Shripatre ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's and Registrar's orders orders ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms.Kalyani Deshpande Adv. For the applicant. Ms. T. Udeshi Adv. For N.A. ..... CORAM: A.B.CHAUDHARI, J. DATED : 19 th JUNE, 2009. This is an application for condonation of delay of 6 years, 11 months and 20 days in filing the second appeal. 2. Heard learned counsel for rival parties. I have gone through the averments in the application. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that since the counsel did not inform the status of appeal, there was no way for the applicant to know about it and that is why there was delay in filing the 2 appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the non- applicants vehemently opposed the application and argued that the averments in the application are as vague as they could be, and that apart, there is delay of about seven years and the delay cannot be condoned on such type of reasons. 4. Having heard learned counsel for rival parties, I find that there is delay of about 7 years in filing the present second appeal. The explanation tendered in para 2 onwards in the application is too sketchy and does not take anywhere. Merely because the counsel did not inform, the appellants could not advance the lame excuse as they were expected to know from the advocate about the progress of the appeal. Having not done so, there is a clear cut negligence and such negligence cannot be allowed to disturb the crystalised rights of the parties by virtue of the impugned judgment and decree. The application for condonation of delay is therefore dismissed. Consequently, Second Appeal St.No. 11076/08 is also dismissed. JUDGE 3 /TA/