Purushottam S/O Natthoba Chaudhary (Dead) Thr. Lrs. Kishor S/O Purushottam Chaudhary v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Collector, Yavatmal And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO. 3101/2019 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 1350/2019 Purushottam S/O Natthoba Chaudhary (Dead) Thr. Lrs. Kishor S/O Purushottam Chaudhary Vs The State Of Maharashtra Through The Collector, Yavatmal And Others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Mr S.V. Ingole, advocate for the appellant.

Ms T.H. Udeshi, AGP for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Ms Mallika Babhulkar, advocate h/f Mr M.A. Kadu, advocate for the respondent No.3.

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.

DATED : 02/05/ 3.

1.

Heard.

2.

The present application is for seeking condonation of delay which is caused in preferring the appeal by the appellant for enhancement of the compensation. 3.

As per the contention of the appellant, the appellant is a poor agriculturist and not aware about the legal intricacies, and therefore, he could not approach the counsel for preferring the appeal.

4.

It is further contended that as the land the appellant was already acquired by the Government under the compulsory acquisition, therefore, he could not manage the amount as he has no source of income and therefore, he could not prefer an appeal within time.

5.

The said application is strongly opposed by the Ms T.H. Udeshi, learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Ms Mallika Babhulkar, advocate holding for Mr M.A. Kadu, learned advocate for respondent No.3, and on the ground that the delay is not properly explained.

6.

Heard both the sides. Perused the application. 7.

Considering the ground raised in the application that the appellant was facing financial crises and only source of income of his land was acquired by the Government under compulsory acquisition, and he could not arrange for the money to pay the Court fee appears to be reasonable and just ground. Moreover, it is well settled that while considering the delay condonation application liberal approach is to be taken, to do substantial justice. 8.

In view of the above, the ground mentioned in the application, and considering the inordinate delay, it will be appropriate to condone the delay, subject to the waiver of the interest on the compensation of amount.

9.

In view of that, delay of 3242 days is condoned, subject to the waiver of the interest for the delayed period. Civil Application is disposed of.

First Appeal St. No. 1350/2019 1.

Heard.

2.

Admit.

3.

Call for record and proceedings.

4.

Ms T.H. Udeshi, learned AGP waives service of notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2.

5.

Ms Mallika Babhulkar, advocate holding for Mr M.A. Kadu, learned advocate waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No.3.

6.

Appellants to file private paper-book within a period of ten weeks after receipt of record and proceedings. 7.

Appeal be placed before the Court after filing of private paper-book and its verification as per its own turn. JUDGE Signed By:RAJESH K NANDURKAR