Namdeo Hitaji Borchate (Dead) And Laxmibai Namdeo Borchate (Dead) Thr. Lrs. Sudarshan N. Borchate v. The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. The Collector, Yavatmal And Others

2024:BHC-NAG:13503

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO.3083 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.19337 OF 2024 Namdeo Hitaji Borchate (Dead) & Laxmibai Namdeo Borchate (Dead) through LRs. .Vs. State of Mah., and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Shri I.M. Ghongade, Advocate for appellants/applicants. Shri S.B. Bissa, A.G.P. for respondents/State. Shri T.M. Zaheer, Advocate for respondent No.3. Shri N.Z. Mirza, Advocate for respondent Nos.4a to 4c. CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.

DATED : 10/12/2024 1.

This is an application for condonation of delay of 2036 days caused for filing first appeal.

2.

Heard learned advocates for both sides.

3.

Perused the application.

4.

All the learned advocates for respondents have strongly objected the application.

5.

The learned advocate for the applicants pointed out in the case of Imrat lal and others Vs. Land Acquisition Collector, reported in 2014 (9) Scale 446 had observed in para 13:

"13. we can taken judicial notice of the fact that villagers in our country are by and large illiterate and are not conversant with the intricacies of law. They are usually guided by their co-villagers, who are familiar with the proceedings in the courts or advocates with whom they get in touch for redressal of their grievance. Affidavits filed in support of the application for condonation of delay are

usually drafted by the advocates on the basis of half backed information made available by the affected persons. Therefore in the acquisition matters involving claim for award of just compensation, the court should adopt a liberal approach and either grant time to the party to file better affidavit to explain delay or suo motu take cognizance of the fact that large number of other similarly situated persons who were affected by the determination of compensation by the Land Acquisition Officer or the reference court have been granted relief."

6.

Considering reason stated in the application as well as ratio laid down in the authority of Imrat lal cited (Supra), and the applicants having poor financial condition, the application therefore deserves to be allowed. 7.

It is made clear that in view of the decision in the case of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority v. Rameshwar @ Ramesh Chandra Sharma (Dead), through Legal Heir and another, reported in (2022 SCC Online SC 1599), the original land owners/claimants/appellants herein shall not be entitled to get any statutory benefits, including the interest payment under the Land Acquisition Act on the enhanced amount of compensation for the delayed period. The appellant /claimant are not entitled for delayed period of 2036 days.

8.

The application is allowed and disposed.

FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.19337 OF 2024 1.

Issue notice to the respondents.

2.

Shri Bissa, learned A.G.P. waives service of notice for the respondents/State.

3.

Shri Zaheer, learned advocate waives service of notice for the respondent No.3.

4.

Shri Mirza, learned advocate waives service of notice for the respondent Nos.4a to 4c.

5.

Place this matter on 14.01.2025 for final hearing.

(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) C.L. Dhakate