1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Civil Application No.3341 of 2007. [Kisanlal S/o Narayandas Agrawal and others] Vs. [Bandulal Laxminarayan Agrawal & another] ---------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances,Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mrs. Anjali Joshi, Advocate for the appellants. Coram: C. L. PANGARKAR, J. Dated: 29th January 2008. 1. This is an application for condoantion of dealy in filing the Second Appeal. 2. The plaintiff appellant had instituted the Civil Suit No.88 of 1986, and the said suit came to be dismissed, while the Counter claim against the plaintiff came to be decreed. Against that decree and dismissal of the suit, the original plaintiff Kisanlal has preferred an appeal. During pendency of 2 the said appeal, Kisanlal as well as his son Chandrashekhar expired. The present appeal, therefore, came to be substituted as the legal representatives in that first appeal before the District Judge. 3. The said appeal No.65 of 1990 came to be decided on 31-10-1995. It is apparent that till the year 2006, the appellants did not even apply for the certified copy. 4. The appellants applied for the certified copy on 20-12-2006, and received the said copy on 28-12-2007. 5. Learned Advocate for the applicants submits that due to lack of legal knowledge, the appellants could not file the appeal. The appellants have only this piece of land for their source of livelihood, and for this reason, delay should be condoned. 6. Learned Advocate for the respondent opposed the application. The only ground that is mentioned in the 3 application for condoning delay in filing appeal is that the applicants are not educated and do not have legal knowledge. It was also contended that the applicants did not have enough funds to file an appeal. 7. Neither of these can be a sufficient ground at all. 8. The delay is enormous, and in no case, a delay of 11 years could be condoned. 9. No explanation, which can be accepted, has been given in this application. 10. The application for condonation of delay, therefore, stands rejected. JUDGE Sbm