The State Of Maharashtra (Through ... vs Shri. Vasant Ganpat Patil
2022 Latest Caselaw 5638 Bom

                                                                                        9 -i-caf 3727-19.doc


                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                         CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3727 OF 2019
                                                        IN
                                         FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 19903 OF 2019

                        The State of Maharashtra
                        (through Special land Acquisition
                        Officer)                                                       ..Appellant
                                     v/s.

                        Shri Vasant Ganpat Patil                                       ..Respondent

                        Ms. Tanaya Goswami, AGP for the Appellant.
                        Mr. G.H.Keluskar for the Respondent.

                                                    CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

DATED : 21st JUNE, 2022.

P.C.

1. By this application the Applicant has sought to condone the delay

of one year and 157 days in challenging the judgment and Award dated

20.09.2017 in LAR 417 of 2000 (Old LAR No.5 of 1990), passed by the

Civil Judge, Senior Division, Alibag.

2. By the impugned judgment and Award, the Reference Court has

partly allowed the reference and awarded enhanced compensation of

Rs.91,39,183/- with interest and other statutory benefits.

3. Heard learned AGP for the State and the learned Counsel for the Digitally signed by PRASANNA P PRASANNA P SALGAONKAR Respondent. I have perused the records and considered the submissions SALGAONKAR Date:

2022.06.23 13:51:01 +0530

P P SALGAONKAR 1 of 3 9 -i-caf 3727-19.doc

advanced by the learned Counsel for the respective parties.

4. Delay is sought to be condoned mainly on the ground that though

the order was passed on 20.09.2017, certified copy was obtained on

27.12.2018, there is delay on the part of the Office of District Collector,

Raigad, (Land Acquisition) in completing the procedure for filing

appeal.

5. The delay, though inordinate, needs to be condoned especially

considering the financial implication involved. It is well settled that in

exercising discretion under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the Court

should adopt a pragmatic and not pedantic approach. In Collector,

Land Acquisition Anantnag & Anr. vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. AIR 1987

SC 1353, the Honourable Supreme Court while laying down certain

principles for condonation of delay has observed that refusing to

condone delay can result in meritorious matter being thrown out at a

very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. Similarly, in S.

Ganesh Raju (Dead) through L.R. & Anr. vs. Narisamma (Dead) through

LR & Ors. (2013)11SCC 341, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that

expression 'sufficient cause' has to be given a liberal construction as to

advance substantial justice and unless the respondents are able to show

malafides in not approaching the Court within the prescribed period of

limitation, generally as a normal rule, delay should be condoned.

P P SALGAONKAR                                                                            2 of 3
                                                                            9 -i-caf 3727-19.doc



                 6.    The delay appears to be bonafide.       Prejudice, if any, can be

compensated by imposing costs. Hence, application is allowed subject

to payment of costs of Rs.5000/- , to be paid to the Respondent.

                                                       (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)




P P SALGAONKAR                                                                          3 of 3