Gujarat High Court
Nathabhai Naranbhai vs State Of Gujarat on 10 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3894/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3894 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 26117 of 2024
==========================================================
NATHABHAI NARANBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.BHAVESH DESAI,AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 10/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Learned AGP Mr. Bhavesh Desai waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent No.1.
2. Learned advocate Mr. Hemal Shah submits that injustice is caused due to wrong calculation made by learned Reference Court in deducting 30% instead of deducting 10% every year from the date of publication of award, which was passed in other case. Learned advocate Mr.Hemal Shah submits in the application that the applicants being unaware of procedural formalities and the time limits prescribed for filing appeals, was delayed Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by MRS. ARCHANA SAJEEVKUMAR PILLAI(HC01899) on Tue Nov 11 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 11 23:29:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/3894/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2025 undefined in approaching competent legal counsel and preparing the necessary documentation. The present appeal is filed for condonation of delay of 1691 days. Learned advocate Mr.Hemal Shah submits that the claimants shall not press for interest for the said period of delay.
3. Per contra, learned AGP Mr. Bhavesh Desai has opposed the application for condonation of delay.
4. This Court has referred to the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Suresh Kumar V/s. State of Haryana and Others reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 896, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that even though there was long delay in filing the appeals, it was a case of compulsory acquisition and there had been a difference in the amount of compensation granted to some land losers vis-a-vis others. Relying on the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Market Committee Hodal V/s. Krishan Murari, reported in 1996 (1) SC 311, wherein delay of 3240 days arising from the same acquisition had been condoned. The Hon'ble Apex Court has also relied on the decision rendered in the case of Huchanagouda V/s. Assistant Commissioner and Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by MRS. ARCHANA SAJEEVKUMAR PILLAI(HC01899) on Tue Nov 11 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 11 23:29:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/3894/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2025 undefined Land Acquisition Officer, reported in 2020 (19) SCC 236, wherein the Court had taken into account the poverty and illiteracy of the land loser and condoned the delay of more than 2,000 days. While condoning the delay, the Hon'ble Apex Court had observed that equities had to be balanced by ensuring that the determination of market value relates back to the preliminary notification - making sure that there is no prejudice to the acquiring authorities, as also no undue advantage to the land loser.
4.1. It is observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the appellants who approached the Court with delay, would not be granted interest for such period. Having considered the explanation offered and the submissions made in the above paragraph No.2, this Court is of the considered view that the application requires to be allowed and the delay is required to be condoned. In that background, the application is allowed.
5. It is needless to clarify that the applicants-original claimants shall not be entitled to the interest in event of the enhancement amount of compensation, if any, for the interregnum period i.e. from the date of Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by MRS. ARCHANA SAJEEVKUMAR PILLAI(HC01899) on Tue Nov 11 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 11 23:29:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/3894/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2025 undefined pronouncement of the impugned judgment and award till the date of filing of the present appeal.
6. Copy of this order shall be placed in the docket of the first appeal. Rule is made absolute.
(M. K. THAKKER,J) ARCHANA S. PILLAI Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by MRS. ARCHANA SAJEEVKUMAR PILLAI(HC01899) on Tue Nov 11 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 11 23:29:02 IST 2025