Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

The Executive Engineer Irrigation Project Strengthening Division Division Omerga Dist OsmanabadversusDyanandev Nivrutti Mule and Ors

Disposal
Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

Holding

The Court condoned the 326‑day delay and allowed the civil application, confirming the stay upon deposit of the amount.

Summary

The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Project Strengthening Division, filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 326‑day delay in filing its appeal. The delay was attributed to the time required to obtain necessary sanctions and administrative permissions, and the applicant asserted it was unintentional. The Court, after considering the explanation, condoned the delay and allowed the application as per prayer clause ‘B’, directing that the appeal be admitted after removal of any office objections. In a related application, the Court noted that the applicant had deposited the entire amount as directed, and consequently confirmed the stay previously granted. Both applications were thereafter disposed of.

Issues considered

  • Whether a delay of 326 days in filing an appeal can be condoned under the Civil Procedure Code.
  • Whether the stay order can be confirmed upon full deposit of the amount by the acquiring body.

Subjects

  • condonation of delay
  • civil procedure
  • stay order
  • appeal admission
  • irrigation project acquisition

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:38255
                                                   1                      945 CA 7944-2025.odt




                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             945 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7944 OF 2025
                             IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 19770 OF 2025
                                              WITH
                     CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7945 OF 2025 IN FAST/19770/2025

              THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER IRRIGATION PROJECT STRENGTHENING
                      DIVISION DIVISION OMERGA DIST OSMANABAD
                                        VERSUS
                        DYANANDEV NIVRUTTI MULE AND OTHERS

                                                 …
             Mr. Satish B. Parnere – Advocate for Applicant
             Dr. Kalpalata B. Patil-Bharaswadkar – AGP for Respondent Nos.3 and
             4/State
                                                 …

                                    CORAM              : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
                                    DATE               : 21.08.2026

             PER COURT :
             CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7944 OF 2025

             1.      This application has been filed by the acquiring body for

             condonation of delay of 326 days. The respondents are served pursuant

             to the notice issued by this Court.


             2.      The reasons for delay are stated in paragraph 4 of the application.

             It is submitted that, due to the usual procedure involved in obtaining

             sanction and administrative permission from the respective authorities,

             considerable time was consumed. Consequently, the delay occurred in

             filing the appeal, which is stated to be unintentional.
                                      2                         945 CA 7944-2025.odt


3.       In view of the explanation given in the application, the delay of

326 days stands condoned.


4.       The Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’.


5.       The appeal be placed for admission after removal of office

objections, if any.



6.       The application is accordingly disposed of.



CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7945 OF 2025 I

7.       Learned Counsel for the applicant/acquiring body submits that, as

directed by this Court on 31.07.2025, the applicant has deposited the

entire amount and accordingly, the said amount has been deposited.



8.       In view of the deposit of the entire amount, the stay granted by this

Court is confirmed. The stay application stands disposed of in terms of

prayer clause ‘B’.



                                             [ MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. ]




Pooja Kale/


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.