: 1 : 3599-09-caf=.sxw UJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3599 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3600 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 21258 OF 2009 IDBI Bank Ltd. .. Applicant v/s. Harbanslal Motiram Dang & Ors. .. Respondents ......... Mr. Rakesh Singh for the applicant Mr. Ramesh Dube Patil i/b M/s. Jay & Co. for respondent no.1. Mr. Nitin Dhumal i/b Mr. V.C. Ghosalkar for respondent no.4 ......... CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J DATE : 19th DECEMBER,2011. P.C. : 1. Heard. This application seeks condonation of delay of 50 days caused in filing of this appeal. The appellant is a nationalized bank. The impugned decree was passed against the appellant bank long ago in 2009 : 2 : 3599-09-caf=.sxw but the appeal could not be filed in time. On perusal of the judgment, it is found that even at trial stage, the appellant bank did not contest the case. The suit filed against the bank and the respondent no.2 who is apparently a cheat and who is not traceable now. It was, therefore, the duty of the appellant bank to defend the suit properly. But it is seen that although the appellant bank filed written statement and that the suit was of serious nature, the appellant’s advocate in the lower Court did not contest the case at all. He did not cross-examine the respondent no.1 plaintiff and so the suit was decreed. 2. The claim of the respondent no.1 is complicated and there are serious allegations against the appellant bank. The appellant bank did not care to defend its action in the lower Court. They continue their negligence while making preparation for filing this appeal. Since the bank is a public sector bank and since the money involved is public money, I am inclined to condone the delay. But the appellant bank should be put to terms. The respondent no.1 original plaintiff opposed the application but I would console him with payment of costs. 3. On the appellant bank’s paying costs of Rs.25,000/- to the : 3 : 3599-09-caf=.sxw respondent no.1 on or before 31st January, 2012, the delay stands condoned. R & P be called for. There is possibility that the appeal could be decided at admission stage. In view of this order, the execution of the decree is stayed till next date. Adjourned to 1st February, 2012. (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.)