Bombay High Court

MAHADEO SITARAM TEKALE AND ORSversusDEELIP WAKIL MULEKAR AND ANR

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

Holding

The court condoned the 907‑day delay in filing the first appeal, allowing the appeal to be registered.

Summary

The petitioners Mahadeo Sitaram Tekale and others filed an application seeking condonation of a 907‑day delay in filing their first appeal. The respondents opposed the condonation, arguing that no sufficient reason existed and that condoning the delay would preclude payment of interest to the appellants. The court examined the application and found that the delay was not deliberately caused. In the interest of justice, the court decided to condone the delay subject to conditions, allowing the appeal to be registered. The court also clarified that if the compensation amount is later enhanced, the appellants will not be entitled to interest for the delayed period.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 907 days in filing a first appeal can be condoned under the principles of justice and procedural law
Whether interest is payable to the appellants if the compensation amount is later enhanced

Subjects

condonation of delay
first appeal
interest
civil procedure
justice

Judgment

                                                22 CA NO. 6976 OF 2025.odt


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD
            22 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6976 OF 2025
                      IN FAST/18239/2025

                 Mahadeo Sitaram Tekale And Ors
                             VERSUS
                   Deelip Wakil Mulekar And Anr
                                 ...
Mr. P. S. Chavan, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. Majit S. Shaikh, Advocate for respondent No.1
Mr. M. R. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent No.2
                                ….

                    CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
                       DATE : 04.03.2026
PER COURT :-

1.         Heard the learned counsel for the parties.


2.         This is an application for condonation of delay of 907

days caused in filing the first appeal.


3.         The learned counsel for respondent No.2 strongly

opposed the application and submitted that there is no sufficient

reason to condone the delay. If delay is condoned no interest shall

be paid to the claimants/appellants.


4.         On perusal of the application, it appears that the delay

has not been deliberately caused. Therefore, in the interest of

justice, the delay deserves to be condoned on certain conditions.


                                                                  1 of 2
                                    (( 2 ))       22 CA NO. 6976 OF 2025


5.         For the reasons stated in the application, the delay stands

condoned. The application stands allowed in the interest of justice.

The appeal be registered.


6.         It is made clear that in case the amount of compensation is

enhanced, the appellants shall not be entitled for the amount of

interest for the delayed period.


FIRST APPEAL

1.         Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 24.06.2026.


2.         Mr. Majit S. Shaikh, learned Advocate waives service of

notice for respondent No.1. Mr. M. R. Deshmukh, learned Advocate

waives service of notice for respondent No.2.


3.         Call Record and Proceedings.


4.         Parties and their respective advocates to note that the

appeal will be heard finally at the admission stage, if time permits.




                                   [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ]
HRJadhav




                                                                     2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…