1 ca6765.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6765 OF 2011 IN SECOND APPEAL ST.NO. 10550 OF 2011 [ Vachhalabai Kundlik Gavane died & Ors. vs. Chinkaji Malhari Jadhav & Ors. ] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr. R.K. Ashtekar, Advocate for applicants. Mr. P.S. Agrawal,Advocate for R-1 to 5. CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 21ST NOVEMBER, 2011 PER COURT : . Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and learned Counsel for the respondents. Learned Counsel for the applicants invited my attention to the contents of the application and medical certificates in respect of ailment of the mother alongwith the application and submitted that, the delay occurred in filing the second appeal. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case which are explained in para-2 and 3 of the 2 ca6765.11 application, therefore, Counsel for the applicants would submit that, the delay may be condoned. 2. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed the application for condonation of delay. He submits that, certificates/documents which are produced on record in respect of ailment of the mother of the applicants do not support the case of the applicant. In fact, all the documents are of the year 2007 and document at Exhibit-31 is dated 24-09-2009. Therefore, according to the Counsel for the respondents, there is no sufficient cause disclosed in the application for condonation of delay. Therefore, this Court may not condone the delay in filing the second appeal. 3. I have given due consideration to the rival submissions. Upon perusal of para-2 and 3 of the application, the ground taken by the applicants is that, their mother expired on 23-10-2010 and prior to that, she was ill for about 9 to 10 months and even from 2007 their mother was taking treatment. In my opinion, though there is considerable delay of 400 days, however, by 3 ca6765.11 delaying in filing second appeal, the applicants are not benefited in any manner. Their suit is for removal of encroachment. Therefore, from the tenor of the application, it appears that, the delay caused in filing second appeal is not intentional or malafide. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of this case, delay deserves to be condoned. Delay stands condoned. 4. Civil Application for condonation of delay is allowed and stands disposed of. . Second Appeal be placed for admission on 08-12-2011. [S.S. SHINDE, J.] sut/NOV11