Dattu Manjaram Karpe v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Collector Jalna And ORS

2025:BHC-AUG:26010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10213 OF 2025 IN FAST/23602/2025 Dattu Manjaram Karpe

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through The Collector Jalna And Ors ...

Mr. D. M. Pingale, Advocate for Applicant Mr. S. V. Hange, AGP for Respondents-State .....

CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR.

DATED : 20TH SEPTEMBER, 2025 ORDER :- .

This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 2840 days that has occurred in challenging the judgment and award dated 25.07.2017, passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalna in Land Acquisition Reference No.1863 of 2010. The appeal and applications are moved by the claimant seeking enhancement in the compensation. 2.

The applicant submits that his source of earning and livelihood has been taken away due to compulsory acquisition of his property. That, very meager amount was awarded to the applicant by the Competent Authority. That even, the learned Reference Court has also not granted adequate enhancement to the applicant. Hence, present First Appeal is filed by the

applicant. However, due to lack of legal knowledge, general awareness of the proceedings and poor financial conditions despite a wish to get enhanced compensation, he could not approach for legal advise, nor could he file the present appeal well within limitation or at the earliest thereafter. With this, the applicant seeks condonation of delay caused in filing present appeal.

3.

Per contra, the respondents oppose condonation of the delay, contending that the application and appeal are filed afterthought and they are filed with sole object to earn more money on sympathy.

4.

Upon having heard the parties, I am of the considered view that enhancement by way of First Appeal is a statutory right of claimant. The farmers, whose agricultural land has been acquired, must get adequate opportunity to claim for adequate and proportionate enhancement in the compensation. For that, technicality of delay must not be a hurdle.

5.

Profitable reference can be made to the judgment and order passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Suresh

Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and ors., (Civil Appeal arising out of (C) No.670/2020) and connected matters decided on 23.04.2025. Their Lordships, after considering series of judgments, have observed in paragraph 11, as follows :- "11.

In all judgments referred supra, the common thread that can be observed is that delay is not a reason to deny the land losers their compensation, which is just, fair and reasonable for the land they have lost."

6.

Thus, for the reasons stated above, I am inclined to condone the delay, caused in filing the First Appeal. Hence, following order:

ORDER

a.

Delay of 2840 days, caused in filing First Appeal is hereby condoned.

b.

Civil Application stands allowed.

c.

Appellant to remove all office objections, if any, within two weeks from today. Failing to which, the registration of appeal shall stand cancelled. d.

Registry to register the appeal, subject to removal of office objections, if any, by the applicant/appellant.

FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.23602 OF 2025 .

Heard.

2.

Issue notice to the respondents. Learned AGP waives service of notice for respondents-State 3.

Admit.

4.

Call Record and Proceeding.

( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. ) Rushikesh/2025