Ramkrushna Dagdu Shimpi v. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation Jalgaon And ORS

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6368 OF 2022 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 35811 OF 2019 WITH FRIST APPEAL ST. NO. 35811 OF 2019 Ramkrushna Dagdu Shimpi .. Applicant

Versus

The Special Land Acquisition Officer & others .. Respondents Mr. I. K. Wagh, Advocate holding for Mr. K. G. More, Advocate for the applicants.

Mr. D. B. Bhange, AGP for the State.

Mr. Darshan Pokharkar, Advocate for respondent No. 2. WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6365 OF 2022 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 35808 OF 2019 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 35808 OF 2019 Aatmaram Pundalik Patil .. Applicant

Versus

The Special Land Acquisition Officer & others .. Respondents Mr. I. K. Wagh, Advocate holding for Mr. K. G. More, Advocate for the applicants.

Mr. D. B. Bhange, AGP for the State.

Mr. Darshan Pokharkar, Advocate for respondent No. 2. WITH CIVIIL APPLICATION NO. 6363 OF 2022 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 35813 OF 2019 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 35813 OF 2019 Vatsalabai Narayan Patil .. Applicant

Versus

- 2 - The Special Land Acquisition Officer & others .. Respondents Mr. I. K. Wagh, Advocate holding for Mr. K. G. More, Advocate for the applicants.

Mr. D. B. Bhange, AGP for the State.

Mr. Darshan Pokharkar, Advocate for respondent No. 2. CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.

DATE : 12th JANUARY, 2024.

PER COURT :

1.

These are the applications for condonation of delay of 857 days in preferring first appeals.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGP for the State and learned counsel for respondent No. 2/acquiring body. 3.

It is the contention of claimants/applicants that due to financial difficulties, the appeals for enhancement of compensation could not be filed in time.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, delay caused in filing the appeals be condoned. The said contention is strongly opposed by learned AGP as well as learned counsel for the acquiring body.

- 3 - 5.

Considering the reasons mentioned in the applications, no malafides can be attributed to the applicants for not preferring the appeals in time. It is clarified that applicants/claimants would not be entitled to interest on amount for the aforesaid period if they succeed in the appeals. In view of this, delay deserves to be condoned. Hence, applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause 'B'. Appeals be registered.

( R. M. JOSHI) Judge dyb