( 1 ) C.A. No. 3021/2010 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Civil Application No. 3021 of 2010 (In Second Appeal Stamp No. 25319/2008) (Datta s/o. Govind Tidke & others Vs. Kalawatibai w/o. Yadav Tidke & others) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders .............................................................................. Mr. P.V. Mandlik, Senior Advocate, holding for Mr. Amol Gandhi, Advocate, for the applicants. Smt. M.R. Jamdade, Advocate, for respondent no.1. .............................................................................. CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 22ND MARCH 2010 1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the applicants and the learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.1. 2. Incorrect prosecution by the appellant landed him in facing delay of 656 days. The Writ Petition was indeed dismissed on 19-9-2008. The exercise of ( 2 ) C.A. No. 3021/2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Second Appeal is certainly within time. The date computed is from the date of decision of the first appellate court. The delay being properly explained, it is condoned, however, on payment of costs of Rs. 2000/- to the respondent no.1. Costs to be paid within 15 days. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.1 makes a statement that the respondent no.1 shall not proceed with the execution for a period of one month. 4. The Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE bgp/ca3021