1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 49. CA/2782/2009 In RC/3114/2003 (The State of Maharashtra Vs. Appa Gangaram Jadhav and others) -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr. S.D.Kaldate, Adv., for applicant. Mr.Sandeep S.Deshmukh, Adv., for respondent nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:22-3-2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard learned A.G.P. 2. Civil Application (No. 2782/2009) for condonation of delay of 1084 days is moved in the Rejected Case No.3114/2003, having done so by the office for non compliance. 3. LAR No.337/1992 is decided on 31.3.1992. Certified copies were not obtained in time. The objections raised by the office were not removed. The appeal was filed on 18.6.2003, which was 2 beyond the period of limitation. 4. Though each days delay is not expected to be explained, however, the delay of virtually more than three years smacks to the conduct of the concerned. Incidentally, with the assistance of learned A.G.P. I have gone through the order of the learned Reference Court dt.31.3.1999 and I find that the enhancement for an amount of Rs.40,296/- is not at a higher pedestal as it has back reference of LAR No.338/1992 in which elaborate orders are passed by the learned Judge. Delay, not being sufficiently explained, Civil Application is rejected. Court fee be refunded. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/2782-09ca