Mandakini W/O Sahebrao Kharat And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Collector, Buldhana

30 CAF-1778-2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CIVIL APPLICATION (F) NO.1778 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.17804 OF 2017 [Mandakini Sahebrao Kharat and Anr. ..Versus.. The State of Maharashtra, through the Collector, Buldhana.] ____________________________________________________________________________________________ OfÏce Notes, OfÏce Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.

Shri. G. O. Gadge, Advocate for Applicants Shri. M. A. Kadu, AGP for Non-Applicant.

CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE, J.

DATE : 29 th NOVEMBER , 2021.

1.

This is an Application for condonation of delay in filing the First Appeal. The delay is of 1649 days. Notices on this Application were issued. In pursuance to the notice, Shri. M. A. Kadu, learned AGP is appearing on behalf of Respondent/Collector.

2.

The land of the Applicants/Original Claimants was acquired by the State. The total area which was acquired by the State for Pentakli Project in Buldhana District for 3.49 H.R. The Land Acquisition OfÏcer has granted compensation at the rate of Rs.53,300/- per hectare. Dissatisfied with the same, the Reference was filed on behalf of the claimants. It appears that the said Reference was dismissed by the Reference Court on 06.11.2012.

3.

I have gone through the contents of the Application, it is specifically stated that the Counsel who was appearing on behalf of the Claimants was not representing the Claimants properly before the Trial

30 CAF-1778-2021 Court. Even from the impugned judgment, the said statement made by the Applicants appears to be correct. Thus, the Reference made by the Claimants was dismissed by the Reference Court, for fault of an Advocate. It is my considered view that for fault of an Advocate, the litigant should not be penalized. In that view of the matter, I pass the following order :

O R D E R

i) Civil Application No.1778 of 2021 is allowed. ii) The delay of 1649 days stands condoned.

iii) OfÏce is directed to register the Appeal iv) At the time of final hearing of Appeal, the Court will decide whether the interest for the delay period should be granted or not.

JUDGE TAMBE by ASHISH ASHOKRAO TAMBE Date:

2021.11.30 18:40:05 +0530 ASHISH ASHOKRAO TAMBE