Gujarat High Court
Executive Engineer vs Dipaliben Rajulbhai on 10 December, 2025
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3439/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3439 of
2025
In
F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 16658 of 2025
================================================================
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
Versus
DIPALIBEN RAJULBHAI & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. DEVANG D DAVE(2627) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS POOJA CHAUDHARY, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
Date : 10/12/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE)
1. The present application is from group of 10 applications for condonation of delay, in which in there applications, private respondent has expired and therefore, in those applications, Civil Applications (for bringing heirs on record) are filed.
2. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 819 days in preferring the appeal against judgment and decree dated 04.11.2022 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar in LRC No.27 of 2009.
Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:34:00 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/3439/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined
3. Rule was issued on 21.08.2025 returnable on 29.09.2025.
4. Learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the contents of paras-3 to 5 of the application and submitted that the delay has occurred on account of procedural aspects and it is not intentional.
5. Learned AGP for the respondent formally opposes the grant of application.
6. Considering the aforesaid, the Court is of the view that considering the facts involved in the case, delay cannot be treated as inordinate.
7. Considering the submissions and the contents of the application mentioned hereinabove, the delay is also explained sufficiently.
8. A reference in this regard may be made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Sheo Raj Singh (Deceased) through Legal Representatives and others vs/. Union of India and Another, reported in, (2023) 10 SCC 531, wherein the term "Sufficient Cause" was interpreted and the approach of Courts while deciding application for condonation of delay was discussed.
Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:34:00 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/3439/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/12/2025 undefined
9. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. The delay of 819 is hereby condoned. Rule is made absolute.
10. The main appeal is ordered to be listed on 22.12.2025. Considering the nature of dispute involved, the date of Section 4 notification and other attending circumstances, the Court may attempt to take First Appeal for final disposal and hence, Registry is directed to call for the Records and Proceedings so as to reach to this Court on or before the next date.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) (J. L. ODEDRA, J) SHITOLE Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Tue Dec 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 17 20:34:00 IST 2025