1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Civil Application No.366 of 2007 in CRA.St.No.19900 of 2007 Mr.A.L.Singh. ..Applicant. Vs. R.B.Singh and ors. ..Respondents. Mr.U.S.R.Singh for the Applicant. Mr.V.R.Tripathi for the Respondent No.4. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 21/8/2009. P.C. . This is an application for condonation of four years delay in filing of the C.R.A. On perusal of the record, it is seen that the impugned judgment and decree was passed on 2.8.2003 in Appeal No.523 of 1999 whereby the said appeal was allowed on the sole ground of jurisdiction and it was held by the Appellate Court that Small Causes Court has jurisdiction only in case of non gratuitous licensee. This aspect has been reconsidered by the full bench of this court and the law in that regard has become final. The reason given for condonation 2 of delay is that after the decree of the appellate court, the applicant lost his possession and he had to go to his village for cultivation as he had no other source of income Though reply has been filed denying this fact and stating that applicant has alternate premises in Bombay, this fact has been denied in the rejoinder. The Advocate for the other respondent has chosen to remain absent. In these circumstances, in the interest of justice, application is allowed subject to payment of costs of Rs.5000/- which will be paid by cheque in the name of respondent No.1 and handed over to the advocate for the respondent. List the matter for admission on 31.8.2009. The Advocate for the respondent No.4 states that he has not received the papers of the main CRA. Advocate for the applicant states that he will serve a copy of the revision application during the course of the day. (R.S.MOHITE, J.) 3