Bombay High Court

THE STATE OF MAH THR. COLLECTOR OSMANABADversusBHARAMANAPPA SIDRAMAPPA BIRAJDAR AND ANR

Disposal: Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Bench: SANJAY A DESHMUKH

Holding

The court condoned the delays in all applications, dismissed the stay application as infructuous, and permitted private service of notice.

Summary

The High Court considered several civil applications filed in 2011 and 2026 relating to a stay of execution, condonation of delay in filing an appeal, and the late inclusion of legal representatives on record. The application for a stay of execution (Civil Application No.15023/2011) was deemed infructuous and dismissed. The court condoned a 459‑day delay in filing an appeal (Civil Application No.15022/2011) after noting the applicant’s lack of deliberate neglect and the need for sanction from the Law and Judiciary Department. Substantial delays of approximately 4,800‑5,000 days in bringing the respondents’ legal representatives on record (Applications Nos.5457/2026 and 5459/2026) were also condoned, emphasizing the claimants’ status as weak‑section farmers and the uncertainty of the deceased’s date of death. The court ordered the amendment of records within two weeks and granted leave for private service of a notice in the cross‑objection. All orders were made in the interest of justice.

Issues considered

Whether a stay of execution of the impugned judgment should be granted.
Whether a delay of 459 days in filing an appeal can be condoned.
Whether delays of about 4,800‑5,000 days in bringing legal representatives on record can be condoned.
Whether notice in the cross‑objection may be served by private mode.

Subjects

condonation of delay
civil procedure
stay of execution
abeyance
private service of notice
farmers
weaker sections

Judgment

                                       (1)                  906 ca 5459.26

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                   906 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5459 OF 2026
                              IN X-OBJ/170/2026
                      WITH X-OBJECTION NO. 170 OF 2026
                               IN FAST/28912/2011
         BHARAMANAPPA SIDRAMAPPA BIRAJDAR DIED THR
           LRS SOJARBAI DIED THR LRS REVUBAI AND ORS.
                             VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR OSMANABAD THR.
                COLLECTOR OSMANABAD AND ANR.

                                        …..
     Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Shashikiran N Patil & Nandkishor S Birajdar.
                 Addl. GP for Respondents/State : Mr. S.G. Sangle
                                        …..

         WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15023 OF 2011 IN FAST/28912/2011


         WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5457 OF 2026 IN FAST/28912/2011


         WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15022 OF 2011 IN FAST/28912/2011
                                       …..
                  Addl. GP for Applicant/State : Mr. S.G. Sangle
                                       …..


                                 CORAM :     SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
                                 DATE :      12.06.2026

P.C.:-

Civil Application No.15023 of 2011 (for stay):

1.            This is an application for granting stay to the execution of

impugned judgment and award which was filed way back in the year 2011.
                                       (2)                906 ca 5459.26

No purpose would be served by keeping the application pending for hearing.

The application has become infructuous and is accordingly disposed of.


Civil Application No.15022 of 2011 (for delay):

2.           This is an application for condonation of delay of 459 days caused

in filing the appeal.


3.           Perused the application. Heard the learned advocates for both the

sides.


4.           The learned AGP for the applicant/State pointed out the grounds

stated in the application particularly the time required for getting sanction

from the Law and Judiciary Department. Considering the reasons stated in

the application, it appears that the delay has not been deliberately caused and

it deserves to be condoned, the delay stands condoned.        The application

stands allowed in the interest of justice.


Civil Application Nos.5457/2026 and 5459/2026:
5.           These are the applications for condonation of delay of 4805 and

4812 days respectively.


6.           Perused the applications. Heard the learned advocates for both

the sides.
                                     (3)                  906 ca 5459.26

7.          No doubt, there is a delay of about 5000 days in bringing the

legal representatives on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

case, and the fact that the claimants in application no.5459/2026 are farmers

belonging to a weaker section of society, and further that the date of death of

the claimant was not known, the delay has occurred.



8.          The delay, therefore, deserves to be condoned in the interest of

justice, and is accordingly condoned. The civil application no.5459/2026 for

setting aside the abatement is allowed. The civil application no.5457/2026 for

bringing the legal representatives of the respondents on record is also

allowed. The amendment be carried out within two weeks from today.



Cross Objection No.170 of 2026:

9.          Issue notice to the respondent no.2, returnable on 03.07.2026. In

addition to regular mode the learned advocate seeks leave to serve the

respondent no.2 by private mode. Leave granted.



                                                [SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.]




mubashir

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…