Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

LAXMAN DHONDIBA MOHITE AND ANRversusMANSING DHONDIBA MOHITE AND ORS

Disposal
Allowed

Holding

The court condoned the 34‑day delay in filing the second appeal, subject to payment of costs to the respondent.

Summary

The applicants, Laxman Dhondiba Mohite and others, filed a second appeal against a district court decree but did so 34 days after the prescribed period. They moved an interim application seeking condonation of the delay, explaining that they are rustic villagers and requesting indulgence. The respondent opposed the condonation, alleging no explanation for the delay. The court examined the record, found no allegation of mala‑fides or any advantage to the applicants from the delay, and noted the applicants’ circumstances. Accordingly, the court allowed the application, condoning the 34‑day delay subject to the applicants paying Rs 5,000 costs to the respondent. The court directed that upon payment of costs within three weeks and receipt of acknowledgment, the second appeal be registered.

Issues considered

  • Whether the 34‑day delay in filing the second appeal can be condoned under the provisions governing appeals and interim applications.

Subjects

  • condonation of delay
  • second appeal
  • civil procedure
  • costs
  • interim application
  • rural litigants

Judgment

                                                                1/3
                                                                                  19-IA-1149-2024 (C).DOC


                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

                                                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                            INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1149 OF 2024
                                                             IN
                                            SECOND APPEAL (ST) NO. 21660 OF 2023

                           Laxman Dhondiba Mohite And Anr.                            …...Applicants
                                VERSUS
                           Mansing Dhondiba Mohite And Ors.                         …...Respondents

                           _________________________________________________________________


                           Mr. Shankar Katkar i/b Adv. Manisha Devkar, for the Applicants.
                           Mr. Sandeep Deshpande i/b Bhavake & Associates, for Respondent No.1.
                           _________________________________________________________________
          Digitally
          signed by
          SHANTANU
SHANTANU SHANKARSA
SHANKARSA DHUDUM
DHUDUM    Date:
          2026.09.03
          20:50:28
                                               CORAM       :   ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
          +0530



                                               DATE        :   3rd SEPTEMBER, 2026.
                           P.C.


                           1.          Heard Mr. Shankar Katkar, learned Advocate for the Applicants

                           and Mr. Sandeep Deshpande, learned Advocate for Respondent No.1.


                           2.          By this Application, the Applicants are seeking condonation of

                           delay of 34 days in filing the Second Appeal against the judgment and

                           decree dated 10th November, 2022 passed by the District Judge – 1,

                           Malshiras, in Civil Misc. Application No.6 of 2020.


                           3.          Mr. Shankar Katkar, learned Advocate for the Applicants, states

                           that the Applicants have set out the reasons for the delay in paragraph



                  Shantanu S. Dhudum
                                               2/3
                                                                  19-IA-1149-2024 (C).DOC


         No.10 of the present Application. He submits that the Applicants are rustic

         villagers and, therefore, seeks that some indulgence be shown to them.


         4.          Mr. Sandeep Deshpande, learned Advocate for Respondent No.1,

         submits that the delay in filing the Second Appeal has not been explained

         by the Applicants. He, therefore, strongly opposes the Application seeking

         condonation of delay.


         5.          Perused the Record.


         6.          There are no allegations of any mala fides against the Applicants

         on behalf of the Respondents. Thus, there is no material on record to show

         that the Applicants would have derived any benefit by delaying the filing of

         the Second Appeal.


         7.          For the reasons stated in the Application and in view of the

         submissions made by Mr. Shankar Katkar, learned Advocate for the

         Applicants, the Application is allowed. The Delay of 34 days in filing the

         Second Appeal is condoned, subject to the Applicants paying costs of

         Rs.5,000/- to Respondent No.1.


         8.          Mr. Shankar Katkar, learned Advocate for the Applicants, states

         that the costs shall be paid to Respondent No.1 within a period of three

         weeks from today.




Shantanu S. Dhudum
                                              3/3
                                                                  19-IA-1149-2024 (C).DOC


         9.          In the event the costs are paid within the time granted and

         acknowledgment of receipt thereof from Respondent No.1 is produced

         before the Registry, the Registry shall register the Second Appeal.


         10.         In view of the above, Interim Application No.1149 of 2026 is

         disposed of.




                                                      ( ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)




Shantanu S. Dhudum


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.