S. U. KAMDAR, J.

( 1 ) C. A. No. 5922 of 2004 : By the present civil application, the applicants/respondents Nos. 2 and 3 are seeking early disposal of the Letters Patent Appeal. Civil Application is granted. Appeal is taken up hearing forthwith.

( 2 ) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties. The present appeal is arising out of the order dated 10th March, 1992 passed by the Single Judge. By the impugned order dated 10th March, 1992, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition as abated. According to the learned Single Judge, there was delay in filing the application for bringing legal heirs of deceased respondent No. 3 on record and in view thereof, application for condonation of delay has been refused and the petition has been dismissed.

( 3 ) THE main petition was filed challenging the order dated 4th July, 1991 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Appeal No. 1/b-109/89 confirming the order dated 10th September, 2004 passed by the Tahsildar. Some of the facts of the present case are as under :

( 4 ) THAT the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 are tribals under the provisions of the maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribe Act, 1974. According to the appellants, the said land being an area of 2. 55 acres situated at village bhadurna, Tahsil Mul, Dist. Chandrapur was agreed to be sold under an agreement to sell dated 27-11-1956 in favour of the father of the appellants and he was placed in possession of the property and deed was executed on 27-12-1950. According to the appellants, since then they are in peaceful possession of the property. In the year 1976-77, revenue proceeding commenced being revenue Case No. 677/lnd-31/76-77 and the appellants received notice dated 11-5-1979 under section 3 of the Act. The notice was challenged by filing writ petition No. 3171 of 1979 and the said proceedings were stayed. On 24-2-1984 the petition was dismissed directing the appellants to appear before the authority. During the pendency of the said proceedings, one of the vendors, viz. Dina Durga kowe died, leaving behind his widow Bhagirathabai and five daughters. The said persons were not made parties to the proceedings. By an order dated 10th october, 1984 an order came to be passed allowing the said application against the appellants herein. The appellants, therefore, filed an appeal before the maharashtra Revenue Tribunal on 9-1-1989. The order of the Tahsildar was stayed by the Tribunal. However, the tribunal ultimately dismissed the appeal by an order dated 4th July, 1991. It is this order of dismissal of appeal by the tribunal which was a subject-matter of challenge in writ petition No. 2571 of 1991.

( 5 ) DURING the pendency of the writ petition, appellants filed an application seeking permission to bring legal heirs of respondent No. 3 on record, saying that immediately after the knowledge of the death of the said respondent No. 3, the application was taken out. However, the learned Single Judge has by an impugned judgment dismissed the petition as abated on the ground that there is considerable delay of about six years in taking out the applications. It is this order of the learned Single Judge which is in appeal before us.

( 6 ) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The learned Counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants and the respondents are residents of adjoining villages while the respondents are residents of adjoining villages which is at a distance of 5 km. and thus, they were not aware about the death of the respondent No. 3. He submits that that delay in the facts of the present case, deserves to be condoned in the interest of justice and appellants may be permitted to bring legal representatives of the deceased respondent No. 3 on record.

( 7 ) ON the other hand, the learned Counsel for the respondents contends that the impugned order deserves no interference. He relied upon the Apex Court judgment in the case of Puran Singh and ors. vs. State of Punjab and ors, (1996)2 SCC