The Executive Engineer, Minor ... vs Dhondopant @ Appasaheb Nanasaheb ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 24604 Bom

Bombay High Court

The Executive Engineer, Minor ... vs Dhondopant @ Appasaheb Nanasaheb ... on 21 August, 2024

Author: Sharmila U. Deshmukh

Bench: Sharmila U. Deshmukh

2024:BHC-AS:33570

                                                                             906ia11804-24


                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                 INTERIM APPLICATION NO.11804 OF 2024
                                                   IN
                                   FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 23328 OF 2024

                The Executive Engineer, Minor
                Irrigation Division No.1, Solapur and Anr.             ... Applicants.
                In the matter between:
                The Executive Engineer, Minor
                Irrigation Division No.1, Solapur and Anr.             ... Appellants.
                        Versus
                Dhondopant @ Appasaheb
                Nanasaheb Deshmukh and Ors.                            ... Respondents.

                                                  ----------
                Mr. Vilas B. Tapkir, for the Applicants.
                Mr. Anand Kulkarni, for Respondent No.2.
                Mr. Anvil S. Kalekar, for the Respondent Nos.1 and 3-Caveators.
                                                 ----------

                                             Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.

Date : August 21, 2024 P. C. :

1. Interim Application has been filed seeking condonation of delay

of 1 year and 11 months caused in filing the present Appeal.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the Applicants would submit that

the impugned Judgment and Award under Section 18 of the Land

Acquisition Act, 1894 came to be passed on 26 th August, 2022 and

thereafter the Application was made for certified copy which was

received on 6th January, 2023. He further submits that the Applicants

sent the proposal to the Head Office for obtaining the permission and

sa_mandawgad 1 of 2 906ia11804-24

subsequently the permission was granted and the First Appeal came

to be filed. He further submits that the Acquiring Body being a

Corporation, certain approvals and permissions were required to be

obtained and hence there is delay. He further submits that the

execution proceedings have been initiated and the entire decretal

amount alongwith accrued interest can be directed to be deposited in

the Reference Court.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the private Respondents-

Claimants opposes the Application and submits that no sufficient

cause have been shown to condone the delay of 1 year and 11 months.

It is further submitted that it is only upon execution application being

filed the present proceedings have been initiated.

4. The fact remains that before the Judgment of the Reference

Court could be challenged by the Applicants in the higher forum,

necessary approvals and permissions were required to be obtained

from the Head Office. It is stated that the proposal was sent to the

Head Office and subsequently the permission was granted. Therefore,

there is sufficient explanation which has been tendered for the delay

of 1 year and 11 months.

5. I am inclined to allow the Application. Accordingly, the Interim

Application stands allowed. The delay of 1 year and 11 months days

stands condoned.

[Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]

2 of 2 Signed by: Sanjay A. Mandawgad Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 22/08/2024 11:19:28