Bombay High Court

SHANKAR S/O. RAMRAO DALVE PATIL.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE DIST COLLECTOR LATUR AND ORS.

Disposal: Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

Holding

The court condoned the delay, allowing the applications subject to an undertaking by the applicant not to claim statutory benefits or interest for the delayed period.

Summary

Shankar, the applicant, filed two civil applications seeking condonation of a 1,457‑day delay in filing his first appeals against the State of Maharashtra and others. The respondent’s counsel appeared, but a third respondent did not appear. The court examined the explanation for the delay, found it satisfactory and not intentional, and therefore allowed the applications on the condition that the applicant gives an undertaking not to claim statutory benefits or interest for the delayed period. The undertaking must be filed with the Registrar within four weeks. Consequently, the applications were allowed as per prayer clause ‘B’ and the civil applications were disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 1,457 days in filing first appeals can be condoned.
Whether the applicant can be conditioned to forgo statutory benefits and interest for the delayed period.

Subjects

delay condonation
civil procedure
statutory benefits
interest
undertaking

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:38400


                                                    1                         962...odt


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6408 OF 2026
                                      IN FAST/16927/2026
                                            WITH
                             CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6409 OF 2026
                                      IN FAST/16981/2026

                           SHANKAR S/O. RAMRAO DALVE PATIL.
                                           VERSUS
                     THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE DIST
                               COLLECTOR LATUR AND ORS.
                                                ...
                       Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Solanke Shrikrashna B.
                       AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : Ms. Preeti Diggikar
                                                …

                                        CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
                                        DATE : 20th AUGUST, 2026

              PER COURT :

              1.           In both these Appeals, there is a delay of 1457 days in filing

              the First Appeals.

              2.           Learned AGP appears for Respondent nos. 1 and 2 and upon

              issuing notice, Respondent no. 3 is served. However, nobody has caused

              appearance for Respondent no. 3.

              3.           The delay is explained in paragraph nos. 4 and 5 of the

              Applications which is satisfactory and it is not intentional or deliberate.

              4.           In view of this, the Applications are allowed subject to

              condition that the Claimants shall give an undertaking before this Court
                                       2                        962...odt


that they will not claim statutory benefit as well as interest of the delayed

period in approaching this Court. This undertaking be given by the

Applicants to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial), of this Court

within a period of four weeks.

5.           In   view    of     the   aforementioned     observations,     the

Applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause 'B'.

6.           The Civil Applications stand disposed of.




                                       ( MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. )




SPC

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…