SHAHJIRAO BHAVANRAO PAWAR L.RS. SUNDARABAI L.RS. KESHAVRAO SHAHAJIRAO PAWAR AND OTHERSversusSHANKAR LIMBAJI WADKAR L.RS. VASANT SHANKAR WADKAR AND OTHERS

                                              901 SA NO. 256 OF 1989.odt


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD
             901 SECOND APPEAL NO. 256 OF 1989

                   Shahjirao Bhavanrao Pawar
                            VERSUS
               Shankar Limbaji Wadkar And Others
                               ...
Mr. Potdar Eklavya Sandesh, Advocate for Appellant
Mr. M. L Dharashive, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2(1) To 2(4),
4(1), 4(2), 6(1) And 6(2),
Mr. R. P. Bhumkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3-1(a) And 3(2)
To 3(4)
                             WITH
    CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11537 OF 2023 IN SA/256/1989
                               ….

                   CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
                     DATE : 30.09.2026
PER COURT :-

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11537 OF 2023

1.        Heard learned Advocates for both sides.


2.        This is an application for condonation of 10,672, 8,676,

8,183, 7,183, 4,305, 4,255, 2,240, 4,479 and 4,507 days delay

caused in filing the Civil Application for bringing the legal

representatives of deceased Respondent Nos.1, 1(3), 1(4), 2(2), 3,

3(1), 3(2), 4 and 6 on record as well as for setting aside

abatement and permission to bring the L.Rs. of deceased

Respondents on record.



                                                                1 of 4
                                    (( 2 ))       901 SA NO. 256 OF 1989


3.        Learned Advocates appearing for the respondents strongly

opposed the application and submitted that the delay has not been

properly explained and that there are no sufficient reasons to

condone the delay as contemplated under Section 5 of the Limitation

Act. They prayed to reject the Application.


4.          Perused the application. Considering the reasons stated

therein and the fact that the Applicants seek to bring the legal

representatives of the deceased Respondent Nos.1, 1(3), 1(4), 2(2),

3, 3(1), 3(2), 4 and 6 on record so as to enable this Court to decide

the lis finally on merits, the delay deserves to be condoned as it is not

deliberately caused. It is well settled that, while considering an

application for setting aside abatement, the Courts are required to

adopt a liberal approach, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in the case of Perumon Bhagvathy Devaswom v. Bhargavi Amma

(Dead) by LRs., (2008) 8 SCC 321 . Further considering the law laid

down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land

Acquisition, Anantnag Vs. Katiji, 1987 AIR (SC) 1353, in which it is

held that expression “sufficient cause” under Section 5 of the

Limitation Act 1963, is required to be construed liberally and in a

manner that enables the Court to advance substantial justice by



                                                                  2 of 4
                                    (( 3 ))       901 SA NO. 256 OF 1989


deciding matters on merits.        The Court further held that the

expression “every day’s delay must be explained” does not warrant a

pedantic approach and that the principles of limitation should be

applied in a rational, common-sense and pragmatic manner. Where

substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each

other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred.



5.           In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case,

the application deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice.

However, considering the fact that there is a huge delay of 10,672,

8,676, 8,183, 7,183, 4,305, 4,255, 2,240, 4,479 and 4,507 days, it

would be proper to impose costs upon the appellant. Accordingly, the

appellant is directed to deposit costs of Rs.10,000/- with the High

Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad, on or before

07.10.2026. Hence, the following order:

                                ::ORDER::


      a.     The application is allowed, subject to the
      deposit of costs of Rs.10,000/- with the office of the
      High     Court    Legal    Services     Sub-Committee,
      Aurangabad on or before 07.10.2026.

      b.     The delay of 10,672, 8,676, 8,183, 7,183,
      4,305, 4,255, 2,240, 4,479 and 4,507 days caused in

                                                                  3 of 4
                                       (( 4 ))       901 SA NO. 256 OF 1989


           filing the Civil Application for bringing the legal
           representatives of deceased Respondent Nos.1, 1(3),
           1(4), 2(2), 3, 3(1), 3(2), 4 and 6 on record is
           condoned.

           c.    The abatement is set aside.

           d.    Permission to bring the legal representatives of
           of deceased Respondents on record is granted. The
           amendment be carried out within a period of two
           weeks from today after depositing the costs. If the
           costs is not deposited within the stipulated period,
           the application shall be deemed to be rejected
           without further reference to the Court.


.               List the matters on 07.10.2026 for taking further steps.

Learned Advocates for both sides are directed to argue the appeal

finally on the next date.




                                         [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ]
HRJadhav




                                                                     4 of 4