1 ca3161.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3161 OF 2011 IN/WITH SECOND APPEAL ST. NO.2109 OF 2011 [ Chetna Sikshan Prasarak Mandal Vaijapur & Ors. vs. Dr. Maya Limbaji Ladwani & Ors. ] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr. V.D. Salunke, Advocate for applicants/appellants. Mr. Shripad Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 21ST NOVEMBER, 2011 PER COURT : . Heard the Counsel for the applicants-appellants. Learned Counsel Counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that, first appeal is maintainable and not second appeal. However, this Court on 11-01-2011 passed order in W.P. No.11413 of 2010 which reads thus : 2 ca3161.11 "1. The remedy of Second Appeal under Section 72(4) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, is available to the petitioner. 2. The petition is allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of, as such, with liberty to file appeal accordingly." 2. Accordingly, pursuant to the order dated 11-01-2011 the appellant has withdrawn the writ petition and filed second appeal. Therefore, in view of the order dated 11-01-2011 objection raised by the Counsel for the respondent No.2 cannot be sustained. 3. Perused the contents of the Civil Application for condonation of delay in filing the second appeal. The Counsel for the respondent No.2 vehemently opposed the application for condonation of delay. However, there is only 12 days delay in 3 ca3161.11 filing the second appeal. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of this case, delay stands condoned. 4. Civil Application for condonation of delay is allowed and disposed of. . Second Appeal be listed for admission on 30-11-2011. [S.S. SHINDE, J.] sut/NOV11