BAPU PARBATI MANE Vs. GORAKNATH JAGU MANE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . The learned Counsel for Respondent waives notice. By consent heard forthwith.

(2.) THERE was delay in filing the appeal of about 135 days by the petitioner. The learned appellate Judge declined to condone the delay on the ground that there was no sufficient cause shown for condonation of delay. The petitioner has pointed out that the petitioner was not looking after the matter and he has executed a power of attorney. The power of attorney did inform as there was dispute between them. He, therefore, contended that there was no negligence on his part. He was not aware about the judgment and decree and immediately took further steps when he came to know. It was only contended by respondent that the power of attorney holder was present in the Court when the judgment was delivered. Petitioner was negligent.

(3.) IN view of this, I pass the following order:- The impugned order dated 24.8.1993 passed by the Additional District Judge, Satara, below Exhibit 1 in Misc. Application No.75 of 1991 is set aside. The appeal to be numbered and to be heard on merits. The petitioner to pay the costs of the respondent quantified at Rs.1,000/-. The petitioner to deposit the said amount in the Appeal Court within four weeks from today. The respondent is permitted to withdraw the same.