The G.M.I.D.C., Thr The Ex. Engineer Urdhva Pravara Project Dam Div., Ghulewadi And ANR v. Haribhau Nivrutti Shete And ANR

942-ca-6707-18.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6707 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL ( STAMP ) NO. 9280 OF 2018 THE G.M.I.D.C., THR THE EX. ENGINEER URDHVA PRAVARA PROJECT DAM DIVISION, GHULEWADI AND ANOTHER

VERSUS

HARIBHAU NIVRUTTI SHETE AND ANOTHER ...

Advocate for Applicant : Shri A. M. Gaikwad AGP for Co-Applicant : Shri S. B. Pulkundwar Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 : Shri V. Y. Bhide ...

CORAM :

N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATE :

09th MARCH, 2021 ...

PER COURT :

This is an application for condonation of 248 days delay in preferring the appeal against the judgment and award dated 02-012017 passed by the Reference Court, in LAR No. 84 of 2011. 2.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents have no objection to condone the delay. 3.

It is trite that an application for condonation of delay should receive liberal consideration. The courts lean in favour of condonation of delay so as to advance the cause of substantive justice and facilitate the adjudication of the matter on merits rather than delay and latches. Having regard to the impersonal nature of the applicants some allowance is required to be given for the time

942-ca-6707-18.odt consumed in initiating the steps to obtain the necessary approvals and make arrangement for filing the appeal. Ultimately, public interest may suffer if the applicants are not allowed to seek adjudication on merits.

4.

An useful reference in this context can be made to the pronouncements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and another Vs. Mst. Katiji and others - (1987) 2 Supreme Court Cases 107 and N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy- (1998) 7 Supreme Court Cases 123, wherein the approach to be adopted was delineated and the principles which ought to govern the exercise of discretion were expounded. 5.

On the aforesaid touchstone, having regard to the impersonal nature of the applicants, the reasons assigned in the application and to advance the cause of substantive justice, the delay deserves to be condoned.

Hence, the following order :- 1.

The application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause "A". The delay is condoned.

2.

Appeal be registered.

(N. J. JAMADAR, J.) shp/-