1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8450 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 462 OF 1994 1) Narayan Bhimrao Kulkarni, Deceased through his L.R.'s .. .. Applicants Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Collector, Jalna, 2. The Land Acquisition Officer, Osmanabad, Dist. Osmanabad. .. .. Respondents Shri A. R. Kale, Advocate h/f Shri S. V. Natu, Advocate for the Applicants. Shri K. G. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. CORAM : B. R. GAVAI, AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 10TH AUGUST, 2009. ORAL ORDER [ Per B. R. Gavai, J.] : 1. This is an application for setting aside abatment. The appeal stood abated since no steps taken for bringing on record the legal representatives of the deceased appellant. The deceased died on 15th July, 1997. It appears that, immediately after his death, an application came to be filed for bringing on record the legal 2 representatives of deceased appellant by the present applicants. The said civil application Stamp No. 19639 of 1997 was undisputedly filed within the prescribed period. However, it appears that in the said matter the registration was refused on the ground that, the lawyer who was engaged by the applicants did not file his Vakalatnama, though it was given to the learned counsel then appearing. It is specifically averred by the applicants in the present application that, the applicants were not communicated about the objection, nor the objection was removed by filing vakalatnama in time, and as such the registration of civil application was refused by learned Additional Registrar on 08th September, 1998. It is averred by the applicants that, however Vakalatnama came to be filed on 27th June, 1999, when registration was already refused. It could further be seen from the record was filed within requisite time that, since no application filed for restoration of the application for bringing legal representatives on record, this Court vide order dated 31st March, 2000 dismissed the appeal as abated. It is further averred in the application that, even after dismissal of the appeal as abated, they were never informed about the same by the lawyer. 2. It is further averred in the application that, when the applicants came to Aurangabad in the month of December 2006, for inquiring about the matter, they came to know that, the lawyer engaged by them was elevated to the Bench. It is further averred that, thereafter the papers were handed over to present lawyer along with the Vakalatnama. It is further averred that, present lawyer was under bonafide impression that appeal was pending. It is averred 3 that only in the month of May 2007 the present lawyer and the applicants came to know that appeal being abated. 3. From the record, it can be seen that, there is an inordinate delay of 2919 days in filling the present application. However, from the record, it is also clear that, the delay has not occasioned due to negligence on the part of the applicants. It is specific case of the present applicants that, they were never informed by the earlier lawyer about the dismissal of the civil application for bringing legal representative's on record, on the ground of non furnishing of vakalatnama, nor they were informed about the dismissal of appeal, on that ground it stood abated. It is also specifically stated that, present lawyer to whom the papers were handed over after earlier lawyer was elevated to Bench, was also under bonafide impression that the matter is pending. Therefore, the delay occasioned in filing the application. 4. We are of the considered view that, litigant should not be made to suffer due to lapses on the part of the lawyer engaged on their behalf. In that view of the matter, though the delay is inordinate, we are inclined to allow the application. The application stands allowed. The abatment is set aside. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [ B. R. GAVAI, J.] bsb/August 09