Gujarat High Court
Shankarbhai Ramabhai Patel vs Andabhai Ramabhai Patel on 22 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4861/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 4861 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 28861 of 2025
==========================================================
SHANKARBHAI RAMABHAI PATEL
Versus
ANDABHAI RAMABHAI PATEL & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VISHAL C MEHTA(6152) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 22/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant, submitted that the delay of 1504 days has occasioned in preferring the appeal against the impugned judgment and award dated 30.04.2021 passed in MACP No.2897/2009 (Old No.34/2005) passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Banaskantha at Deesa. He further submitted that the certified copies of the judgment and award was applied on 01.05.2025 and the same were made ready for the delivery on 06.05.2025. He further submitted that the applicant could not prefer the appeal owing to the reason of poverty and thereafter, due to the lockdown prevailing across the country due to Covid-19 pandemic. He further submitted that the delay is neither intentional nor malafide but has occasioned owing to the reasons of poverty and Covid-19 pandemic.
Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 22:31:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4861/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2025 undefined
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, it is evident that due to Covid-19 pandemic, the entire country was paralyzed and the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 23.03.2020 passed in suo moto Writ Peititon (Civil Application No.3/2020), has excluded that period for the purpose of filing the cases. Further, having regard to the poverty of the applicant, in my considered view, is sufficient to condone the delay. At this juncture, it would be profitable to refer the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Another Vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, reported in AIR (1987) SC 1353, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down the guidelines as under:-
"1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late.
2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is con- doned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties.
3. "Every day's delay must be explained" does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner.
4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay.
5. There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of mala fides.
Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 22:31:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/4861/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2025 undefined
A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact he runs a serious risk.
6. It must be grasped that judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so."
4. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag (supra), I am of the considered view that the delay is required to be condoned subject to the condition that the applicant shall not be entitled for the interest of delayed period, on the enhanced amount of compensation, if the appeal for enhancement is allowed. In view of the above, the present application stands allowed. No order as to costs.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J) HARSHIT Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 22:31:17 IST 2025