Sakharam Deorao Garad Died Thro. Lrs. Babarao Sakhram Garad And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

1 ca-7943-14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7943 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 12692 OF 2014 Shridhar Madhavrao Patil and another ...APPLICANTS versus The State of Maharashtra and another ...RESPONDENTS .....

Mr. H.B. Nandagavale, Advocate holding for Mr. V.G. Sakolkar, Advocate for applicants Mr. R.B. Bagul, AGP for respondent No. 1 Mr. Anand Chaware, Advocate for respondent - Acquiring Body .....

WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7944 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO 12847 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7945 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO 12711 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7946 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO 12709 OF 2014 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7947 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO 12713 OF 2014 .....

CORAM : K.K. SONAWANE, J.

DATED : 21st AUGUST, 2017.

Order :- 1.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the applications.

2.

The learned counsel for the applicants-original claimants submits that the applicants have filed References under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmedpur, camp at Udgir. After appreciating the entire evidence adduced on record the learned Reference Court passed the impugned Awards in the month of April, 2008, but the applicants were not aware of the impugned Judgments and Awards. When the applicants-original claimants came to known about the decision passed by the Reference

2 ca-7943-14 Court, they consulted the concerned Advocate, who advised them to file first appeals before this Court. According to learned counsel, the applicants are rustic and illiterate persons having no knowledge about the legal procedure as well as they had a financial crisis, therefore, they could not present the appeals within stipulated period. Eventually, the applicants procured requisite amount for court fees and stamp papers etc. and preferred the present appeals, but there is delay in filing the appeals. The delay so caused in preferring the appeals is not intentional or deliberate, but due to poor financial condition as well as having no knowledge about the legal procedure. Moreover, the learned counsel submits that the applicants - appellants will not claim statutory benefits as well as amount of interest as laid down in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for the period of delay sought to be condoned, in case of success of appeals on merit and prayed to allow the applications for condonation of delay.

3.

The learned AGP for respondent - State and Mr Chaware, learned counsel for respondent - Acquiring Body raised objection and submit that reasons mentioned in the applications are not sufficient to condone the delay as contemplated under section 5 of the Limitation Act. There are no reasonable ground on record to condone the delay, therefore, they both prayed to dismiss the applications. 4.

I have given anxious consideration to the arguments advanced on behalf of both sides. Perused the applications and relevant documents on record. Admittedly, the matter pertains to enhancement of compensation of lands acquired by the respondents for the

3 ca-7943-14 construction of percolation tank at village Deoni. The claimants have also preferred the References under sections 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the same were adjudicated on merits by the Reference Court, however, the applicants-claimants are not satisfied with quantum awarded by the Reference Court and market value determined for their acquired land. Hence, the claimants are intending to prefer an appeals, but there is huge delay in filing the appeals. 5.

In view of the aforesaid submissions and for the reasons mentioned in the applications that the applicants are rustic and illiterate persons having no knowledge about the legal procedure as well as they had a financial crisis, I find it justifiable to give reasonable opportunity to the applicants-appellants in the interest of justice to ventilate the grievances before the Appellate Forum. There is sufficient cause to allow the applications for condonation of delay. In addition, the applicants/ claimants have shown their willingness / inclination that they will not claim statutory benefits as mentioned above. In such circumstances, by imposing aforesaid fetter of waiver of statutory benefits on the part of applicants-appellants, there would not be any impediment to condone the delay. The applications for condonation of delay deserve to be allowed.

6.

In sequel, applications stand allowed in terms of prayer clause "B". The delay caused to present the appeals against the impugned Awards stands condoned subject to condition that applicants-appellants shall not claim statutory benefits as well as amount of interest as laid down in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the delayed period allowed

4 ca-7943-14 to be condoned, in case, any enhanced compensation is awarded by this Court after adjudication of appeal on merit. 7.

Pursuant to aforesaid waiver of statutory claim, the applicantsappellants shall furnish undertaking to that effect and place it on record of the appeal to enable this Court to take note of the same, while decision of the appeals on merit. Registry to take requisite steps for further process.

8.

The civil applications are allowed in aforesaid terms and stand disposed of.

Sd/- [ K. K. SONAWANE ] JUDGE MTK