Gujarat High Court
Rabari Hirabhai Bhathibhai vs State Of Gujarat on 21 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4745/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 4745 of
2025
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4226 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4746 of 2025
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4227 of 2025
==========================================================
RABARI HIRABHAI BHATHIBHAI & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RAKESH R PATEL(3239) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
BHAVESH DESAI AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
MS ARCHANA R ACHARYA(2475) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 21/11/2025
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. The present application has been filed for condonation of delay of 966 days in filing the first appeal. The following grounds are mentioned in the application, which are as under.
"2. The applicants submits that though the impugned judgment and order was declared on 27/09/2022, the payment of compensation has been deposited on 9/11/2023 by the state authorities and thereafter after some procedure, the respondents started disbursement to the claimants from the month of march 2024 onwards.
3. The applicants submits that for to file first appeal before the Hon'ble Court for enhancement, the Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by Vikramsinh Amarsinh(HCW0055) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 24 21:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4745/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined applicants were required to pay a court fees. However, since the applicant is illiterate poor agriculturist and has lost his land and as against that the learned special land acquisition officer had granted only Rs.4.65 per sq.mt. and therefore, due to not having sufficient amount for court fees, the applicants had waited for his own legitimate amount of compensation and therefore, there is a delay. However as soon as enhance amount of compensation has been paid, the applicants have contacted the advocate and thereafter further procedure was filed.
4. It is respectfully submitted that the reference filed by the applicants were heard with other references of the same acquisition case and notification and in fact all the references were consolidated and have been disposed off with common judgment and order. Therefore, all the claimants had decided to file further appeal for enhancement together with a view to save expenses of litigation. However, since the main claimant had expired during the pendency of the reference, Civil Misc Application no. 7/2025 was filed by legal heirs of respective deceased claimant, applicants herein to be joined. Thereafter, above Civil Misc application was allowed by an order dated 13/05/2025 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge & Additional C.J.M.Judge, Deodar. Subsequent to thereafter, certified copy of the amended judgement and decree was applied on 2/06/2025 and the same was received by the applicant on 2/06/2025.
Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by Vikramsinh Amarsinh(HCW0055) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 24 21:27:39 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4745/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined
5. The applicant is illiterate agriculturist and therefore due to insufficient knowledge/guidance and not conversant with the intricacies of law could not approached to the Honorable Court within limitation period.
2. By submitting the same, learned advocate Mr. Patel submitted that the delay caused in filing the appeal was due to the circumstances which are beyond the control of the applicant and therefore, it is prayed to allow the application. Learned advocate Mr. Patel relied on the order passed by this Court in identically situated cases, wherein this Court has condoned the delay of 865 days and 921 days in the First Appeals which were filed against the common judgment and order rendered in the acquisition proceeding. Learned advocate Mr. Patel submits that applicants would not claim the interest for the interregnum period, i.e., from the date of the award till the date of filing the application and therefore, he prays that this application may be allowed.
3. The application is opposed by the learned advocate Ms. Acharya for the respondent No.3 and submitted that no explanation offered in the application and as per the decision by Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by Vikramsinh Amarsinh(HCW0055) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 24 21:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4745/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Shivamma (Dead) By Lrs V/s. Karnataka Housing Board rendered in Civil Appeal No.11794 of 2025, wherein it is held that in absence of sufficient cause, delay should not be condoned, the learned Court would not take a liberal view.
4. Having considered the submission made by the learned advocates for the respective parties and referring to the reasons mentioned in the application, more particularly with regard to the disbursement of the awarded amount which was started from 02.06.2025; thereafter, due to the death of the claimant who expired during the pendency of the reference, an application for bringing heirs came to be filed before the learned Reference Court, being Civil Miscellaneous Application No.07 of 2025, which was allowed and the judgment and decree was modified and due to the same reason, delay is caused. 4.1 On referring to the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, wherein it is stated that the lethargic approach can never be termed "sufficient ground" for condonation of delay; in that background, the Court has allowed the appeal challenging the order passed by the High Court allowing the application for Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by Vikramsinh Amarsinh(HCW0055) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 24 21:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4745/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025 undefined condonation of delay. In the opinion of this Court, the explanation offered cannot be said to be a lethargic approach and the same would be sufficient cause for condoning the delay and in that scenario, the application deserves to be allowed.
5. Resultantly, the present applications are allowed.
6. 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 pronouncement of the impugned judgment and award till the date of filing of the present appeal.
7. Copy of this order shall be placed in the docket of the first appeal. Rule is made absolute.
ORDER IN R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4226 and 4227 of 2025 ADMIT.
To be heard with First Appeal No.3917 of 2025.
(M. K. THAKKER,J) Vikramsinh Amarsinh Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by Vikramsinh Amarsinh(HCW0055) on Mon Nov 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 24 21:27:39 IST 2025