1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1089 OF 2010 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST.) NO. 491 OF 2010 ________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | ________________________________________________________ Heard counsel appearing for both sides. This application is filed for condonation of delay of 370 days delay in filing appeal from order arising out of the judgment and order dated 4.10.2008, passed by the Adhoc District Judge, Latur in R.C.A. No. 4 of 2008. Counsel appearing for the applicants invited my attention to paras 3, 4 and 5 of the application and contended that the advocate who was engaged by the applicants did not inform the outcome of the Regular Civil Appeal to the applicant No.1, who is old aged person and since there was no communication by the advocate, the applicant could not file the Appeal from Order within time. He further submitted that the applicants came to know about passing of remand order only when the respondent sought amendment in the plaint and therefore, the learned counsel for the applicants 2 would submit that the delay has been properly explained. However, counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the application and contended that there is no sufficient cause disclosed in the application for condonation of delay. Taking into consideration the fact that the advocate who was engaged on behalf of the applicants did represent the applicants before the appellate court in R.C.A. No. 4 of 2008 and from perusal of the para 17, it clearly emerges that the advocate for the present applicants i.e. original respondent did argue the matter, therefore, it cannot be said that the applicants were not represented before the appellate Court or for that reason the advocate has not communicated the order to the applicants. Taking into consideration the averments in the application, I find that no sufficient cause has been disclosed in the application. Inordinate delay of 370 days in filing the appeal cannot be condoned. Application stands rejected. (S. S. SHINDE. J.) Date:28.09.2010. rlj/