Heard Mr. S. Sarma, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. A. kabra, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 1.

           A/D card in respect of service of notice upon respondent No. 2 has not been returned back after service. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant has submitted that another appeal being F.A. 72/2016 has been filed by the respondent No. 2 against the same judgment challenged in appeal No. F.A. 36/2016.

           Perused record. It appears that notice to the respondent No. 2 was repeatedly issued on different dates since 2016. In view of the matter, service of notice upon respondent No. 2 is deemed to be served.

           This is an application filed by the applicant praying for condoning the delay of 75 days in the accompanying appeal. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1 has fairly submitted that he has no objection if the delay is condoned.

           In view of the grounds mentioned in para 4,5 and 6 of the application, we found that there are sufficient grounds to condone the delay. Accordingly, delay in preferring the accompanying appeal is condoned.

           Misc Case is allowed and disposed of accordingly.