Pandurang Baburao Shinde Died Thr Lrs Dnyanoba And ANR v. The State Of Mah, Thr. Collector, Latur
2026:BHC-AUG:3207 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 930 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13691 OF 2025 IN X-OBJST/32211/2025 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1345 OF 2010 IN/WITH FA/2233/2011 Jijabai Tukaram Halgare
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others. .....
AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13694 OF 2025 IN X-OBJST/32232/2025 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1131 OF 2010 IN/WITH FA/1173/2010 Mukind Kerba Bansode
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others. ...
AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13692 OF 2025 IN X-OBJST/32255/2025 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1349 OF 2010 IN/WITH FA/1170/2010 Babruwahan Nivruti Tore
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others. ....
AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13688 OF 2025 IN X-OBJST/32261/2025 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1333 OF 2010 IN/WITH FA/1169/2010 Pandurang Baburao Shinde (Died through L.Rs.) and another
VERSUS
-2State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others. .....
AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13690 OF 2025 IN X-OBJST/32235/2025 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1347 OF 2010 IN/WITH FA/1171/2010 Balaji Nivratti Tore
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others. .....
AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13689 OF 2025 IN X-OBJST/32267/2025 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1339 OF 2010 IN/WITH FA/1168/2010 Dattu Vitthalrao Shinde and another
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others. .....
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Sandeep C. Swami AGP for Respondent No.1: Mr. V.V. Jahagirdar Advocate for Respondent No.2: Mr. A.D. Soman .....
CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
DATED : 23rd JANUARY, 2026 PER COURT :- 1.
These are the civil applications filed for condonation of delay caused in filing the cross objections. Perused the applications. Heard learned advocates for both sides. Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that the applicants are poor agriculturists whose lands are acquired. They are not conversant with the provisions of law and could not file the cross objections within time. Therefore, in
-3the interest of justice, the applications deserve to be allowed. 2.
Learned advocate for the respondents strongly opposed the applications by submitting that there is no sufficient cause shown to condone the delay. He therefore, prayed to reject the applications. 3.
On perusal of applications and the law laid down in the case of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority vs. Rameshwar @ Ramesh Chandra Sharma (Dead) Through Legal Heir and Another; 2022 SCC Online SC 1599, it would be proper to condone the delay in the interest of justice as the claimants are poor agriculturists and it would be proper to decide their rights finally on merits. The applications are thus allowed. The delay caused in filing the cross objections is condoned.
4.
In cross objections, issue notice to the respondents. Learned A.G.P. waives notice for respondent No.1 and learned advocate Mr. Soman, waives notice for respondent No.2. (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) rlj/