IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 345 OF 2004 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 1 OF 1998 SHRI SADASHIV B.KANEKAR AND ANR., ... Applicants Versus BARKILO G.SAUNTO(DEC.) THROUGH L.RS., ... Respondent Ms. R. Kamat, Advocate for the applicants. Mr.R.G.Ramani, Advocate for the respondent Nos.3 & 5. Coram:- C. L. PANGARKAR, J. Date:- 7th January, 2009 P.C. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicants and respondents. This application has been filed for substitution of the legal representatives of deceased respondent No.6. The respondent No.6 is said to have died on 05.04.2002 and the application for substitution, has been preferred on 23.04.2004. Obviously, there is delay in preferring the application and as such the applicants also moved an application for setting aside abatement as well as condonation of delay in preferring the application for setting aside abatement. The applicants contend that they come to know about the death of respondent No.6 when the Advocate of respondent No.6, informed the Court about the death of respondent No.6. In view of this submission and averments made in the application, the abatement stands set aside. The delay stands condoned. The legal representatives of deceased respondent No.6, be brought on record. The appeal memo be amended. C. L. PANGARKAR, J. SMA