Gujarat High Court
Maganbhai Govindbhai vs State Of Gujarat on 19 September, 2025
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1647/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1647 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 15468 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR AMENDMENT) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1647 of 2025
================================================================
MAGANBHAI GOVINDBHAI & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR KRUSHNAKANT D PATEL(10632) for the Applicant(s) No.
1,2,2.1,2.2,2.3,2.4
MR TEJAS P SATTA(3149) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,2.1,2.2,2.3,2.4
MR. SHIVAM DIXIT, for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
===============================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
Date : 19/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE)
1. Rule. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 725 days in preferring the appeal.
2. Learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the contents of the application, wherein it stated that the applicants have preferred the present First Appeal for enhancement of compensation. However, there has been a delay and therefore, the applicants preferred the civil application for condonation of delay, but afterward which was withdrawn with the liberty to file a fresh civil Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by SIDDHARTH(HC01065) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 22:56:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1647/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined application for same cause with better particulars on 12.09.2023. Thereafter, the present application is filed. It is submitted that other claimants of the same group whose Lands Acquired under the same acquisition informed about such proceeding and the applicant came to know about such proceeding and the applicants contacted to the advocate for further proceeding of the matter. Thus, the present application for condonation of delay is being filed.
3. Therefore, learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the reasons for which delay has occurred.
4. Learned AGP for the respondent formally opposes the grant of application.
5. Considering the aforesaid, particularly, period of 725 days of delay, the Court is of the view that considering the facts involved in the case, delay cannot be treated as inordinate.
6. Considering the submissions and the contents of the para mentioned hereinabove, the delay is also explained sufficiently.
7. 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 Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by SIDDHARTH(HC01065) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 22:56:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1647/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined 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.
8. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. The delay of 725 days caused in preferring the appeal is hereby condoned. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Registry is directed to list the main appeal in due course.
ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1 OF 2025
1. The present application is filed for following reliefs:-
"A. The Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant this Draft Amendment and application maybe heard on merits.
2. It is submitted that the applicants have preferred the present First Appeal for enhancement of compensation. However, there has been a delay and therefore, the applicants preferred the civil application for condonation of delay, but afterward which was withdrawn with the liberty to file a fresh civil application for same cause with better particulars on 12.09.2023.Thereafter application for condonation of delay is filed, but due to typographical error, the delay of 725 days is mentioned instead of 1441 days. Hence, the present application is filed for amendment in the prayer clause.
Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by SIDDHARTH(HC01065) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 22:56:36 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/1647/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined
3. Considering the averments made in the application, the present application is allowed. The delay mentioned in prayer clause No.20(B) in Civil Application No.1647 of 2025 is rectified to '1441 days' instead of 725 days.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) (J. L. ODEDRA, J) SIDDHARTH Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by SIDDHARTH(HC01065) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 22:56:36 IST 2025