1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY:
NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 3358 of 2008
PETITIONER:
Vitthalrao Sadashivrao Tarale, aged bout 66 years,
occupation : Retired Serviceman, r/o Yashoda Nagar,
Kandali,Tahsil Achalpur, District : Amravati.
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS:
1] Maharashtra State Electricity Board, Chief Engineer
(Executive) Achalpur, Tah. Achalpur Dist. Amravati.
2] Satish Pimpalkar, aged bout 45 years, occupation :
Contractor, r/o Pimpalkar Road, Paratwada, Tahsil
Achalpur, District : Amravati.
Advocate P.S. Patil, for petitioner
Advocate M.A. Hussain, for respondent no.1.
===================================
CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATE: 6.10.2008
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Advocate Patil for petitioner and Advocate
Hussain for respondent no.1. Nobody appears for respondent no.2.
Considering the nature of controversy, the matter is heard finally.
2] Advocate Patil points out that court below has not
condoned the delay of 26 days in filing appeal on the ground that
petitioner has brought certificate of doctor from some other place
with which he had no connection. Advocate Patil informs that
brother in law of petitioner resides at that place and petitioner has
taken treatment from doctor practicing there. He also invites
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:56:41 :::
2
attention to statement made on affidavit in this petition. Hence he
states that the delay ought to have been condoned. Even if it is
accepted that reasons put forth in application are not just and
sufficient, because of small delay, the same deserves to be condoned
in the interest of justice. Advocate Hussain defends the impugned
order and he states that the application as filed could itself have
been self sufficient with necessary details. He states that serious
prejudice would be caused to M.S.E.B. if the delay is condoned.
3] I can not accept the reasons put forth by trial court for
rejecting the doctor’s certificate. Moreover, explanation for that
purpose has now come on record in the present writ petition. Delay
is of only 26 days. In these circumstances, delay is condoned subject
to present petitioner paying respondent no.1 M.S.E.B. Rs.1300/- by
20.10.2008. If the costs are so paid with the court of District Judge
-2 & Additional Sessions Judge Achalpur, he should direct
registration of the appeal filed by the present petitioner and to
proceed for deciding it in accordance with law. Rule accordingly.
JUDGE
smp.
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:56:41 :::