The G.M.I.D.C., Thr Its Ex. Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Osmanabad v. Ashok Gundappa Ujankar And ORS

{1} CA 2890 OF 2020 & ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 921 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2890 OF 2020 IN FAST/7885/2019 THE G.M.I.D.C., THR ITS EX. ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, OSMANABAD

VERSUS

ASHOK GUNDAPPA UJANKAR AND ORS ...

Advocate for Applicant-Acquiring Body : Mr.Hiraji T.Gaikwad AGP for Respondents-State Authorities : Mr.P.M.Kulkarni Advocate for Respondents-claimants : Mr.L.C.Patil ...

WITH CA/2885/2020 IN FAST/9076/2019 WITH CA/2888/2020 IN FAST/9082/2019 WITH CA/2892/2020 IN FAST/9079/2019 ...

CORAM : K.K.SONAWANE, J.

DATE: 4th March, 2020 PER COURT:- 1.

Issue notice to the respondents. Mr.L.C.Patil, learned counsel waives service of notice for respondents-claimants. He undertakes to fle Vakalatnama during the course of day. Learned AGP waives service of notice for respondents-State Authorities. Therefore, service complete.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant-Acquiring Body and learned counsel for respondents-claimants as well as learned AGP for respondents-State Authorities. Perused the applications and relevant documents produced on record.

3.

The applicant-Acquiring Body moved present applications for condonation of delay caused in fling the frst appeals against impugned Judgment and Award passed by the learned Reference

{2} CA 2890 OF 2020 & ORS. Court in Land Acquisition References fled under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. According to learned counsel for the applicant-Acquiring Body, impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Reference Court is erroneous, illegal and is not as per the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Applicant is Body corporate having its independent entity. After procuring the funds for court fees appeal came to be fled, however, there is delay in fling the appeals. According to learned counsel for applicant, delay so caused is not intentional or deliberate, but caused due to compliance of ofcial process.

4.

Learned counsel appearing for respondents-claimants raised objections and submits that delay has not been explained satisfactorily. The learned Reference Court has correctly appreciated evidence on record and awarded reasonable market value for the acquired lands. Therefore, delay may not be condoned.

5.

I have given anxious consideration to the submissions advanced on behalf of both the learned counsel. Considering the nature of the subject-matter and reasons mentioned in the applications, I do not fnd any impediment to allow the applications for condonation of delay. The public interest is involved into the matter. It is settled law that liberal and pragmatic approach is essential to be adopted by avoiding pedantic approach while dealing with the application for consideration of delay. Therefore, it is imperative to grant some sort of latitude to the applicant - Acquiring Body to present appeals by condoning the delay. It would not cause any prejudice or injustice to the respondents. In contrast, it would sub-serve the purpose of substantial justice. Hence, the applications for condonation of delay deserve to be allowed. In sequel, the

{3} CA 2890 OF 2020 & ORS. applications stand allowed in terms of prayer clause (B). Delay caused in fling appeals against the impugned Judgment and Award is hereby condoned. Registry to take requisite steps for registration of appeals. Civil applications stand disposed of accordingly.

6.

On registration of appeals, issue notice of admission of appeals to the respondents. Mr.L.C.Patil, learned counsel waives service of notice for respondents-claimants. Learned AGP waives service of notice for respondents-State Authorities.

7. After compliance of procedural formalities, list the appeals for further process in due course.

( K.K.SONAWANE ) JUDGE SPT