IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 350 OF 2008 IN STAMP NUMBER MAIN NO. 816 OF 2008 SHRI. SHIVRAM ANANT DESSAI (DECEASED) THROUGH LR'S ... Applicant Versus SHRI. ARJUN RAMCHANDRA PEDNEKAR (DECEASED) THROUGH LR'S ... Respondent Mr. A. D. Bhobe, Advocate for the Applicants. Coram:- R. M. SAVANT, J. Date:- 16th December, 2009 P.C. By the above Civil Application, the Applicants pray for condonation of delay of 347 days in filing the Second Appeal. The reasons why the delay has occasioned has been mentioned in the Civil Application. 2. The sum and substance of the case is that the Applicants were pursuing a Review Application which was filed by them in the Court of the learned Adhoc District Judge-III (FTC), Mapusa, seeking review of the Judgment and Decree dated 14.12.2006, passed in Regular Civil Appeal no.80/2002, as a result of which, there is an overlap of time. 3. The above Misc. Civil Application was on board for hearing on 05.12.2009 when this Court adjourned it to 11.12.2009 as no appearance was put up on behalf of the Respondent on the said day. The Application thereafter appeared on 11.12.2009, when the same position continued. Though the Applicants were represented, the Respondents were not represented by the Counsel engaged by them. This Court was, therefore, pleased to adjourn the above Misc. Civil Application to this day by requesting the learned Counsel for the Applicant to inform the learned Counsel for the Respondent. Shri Bhobe, appearing on behalf of the Applicant, states that he had accordingly intimated the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent, Shri Amonkar. Inspite of the last chance granted by this Court by Order dated 05.12.2009 and the further opportunities given by this Court, no appearance is put up on behalf of the Respondent. This Court is, therefore, constrained to decide the Application in the absence of the Respondent. 4. Having considered the reasons mentioned in the above Misc. Civil Application, in my view, the said reasons can be plausible grounds for the delay which has occurred in the filing of the Second Appeal. 5. Resultantly, the Applicant has shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay. The Misc. Civil Application is, therefore, allowed and the delay of 347 days in filing the Second Appeal is accordingly condoned. 6. Misc. Civil Application is disposed of. R. M. SAVANT, J. arp/*