Bombay High Court
Ashok Gorakhsnath Honde And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 25 November, 2025
2025:BHC-AUG:32493
1 88 ca 2334.25 group
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2334 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35451 OF 2024
Sopan Shripati Thorat
Since deceased through his L.Rs.
Kishor Sopanrao Thorat and others .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2335 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35502 OF 2024
Balkrushna Jaywant Kurhat .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2336 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35503 OF 2024
Vitthal Nana Punde
Since deceased through his L.Rs.
Machindra Vithal Punde .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2337 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35505 OF 2024
Machhindra Chandrabhan Honde .. Applicant
2 88 ca 2334.25 group
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2343 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35455 OF 2024
Gorakhnath Bhikaji Sonar @
Udawant Since deceased through his
L.Rs. Ushabai Sudhakar Dahale
and others .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2344 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35453 OF 2024
Sumanbai Gangadhar Ghadge .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2345 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35461 OF 2024
Kashinath Bhikaji Udawant
Since deceased through his L.Rs.
Babasaheb Kashinath Udawant
and others .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2346 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35459 OF 2024
3 88 ca 2334.25 group
Santosh Dattatray Pund and another .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2347 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35457 OF 2024
Shaikh Amin Karimbhai W/o
Shaikh Ajim Karimbhai .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2350 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35482 OF 2024
Trimbak Thamaji Pund
Since deceased through his L.Rs.
Mhatardev Trimbak Pund and others .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2351 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35480 OF 2024
Ashok Gorakshnath Honde and others .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2352 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35468 OF 2024
4 88 ca 2334.25 group
Suryabhan Malhari Todmal
Since deceased through his L.Rs.
Laxmibai Suryabhan Todmal and others .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2353 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35494 OF 2024
Namdeo Jaywant Kurhat .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2354 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35496 OF 2024
Chandrabhagabai Bhikaji Kharde .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2355 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35498 OF 2024
Nivrutti Maruti Honde .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2356 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35500 OF 2024
Rajendra Nivrutti Honde .. Applicant
Versus
5 88 ca 2334.25 group
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2357 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35484 OF 2024
Kisan Chandrabhan Honde .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2358 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35486 OF 2024
Bhagwat Gangaram Pawar
Since deceased through his L.Rs.
Laxman Bhagwat Pawar and others .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2359 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35492 OF 2024
Chandrabhan Malhari Todmal .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2360 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35463 OF 2024
Dattatraya Baburao Pund .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
6 88 ca 2334.25 group
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2361 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35465 OF 2024
Shaikh Ajij Karimbhai .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector Ahmednagar and another .. Respondents
Mrs. Manjushri V. Narwade, Advocate for the Applicants in all
matters.
Shri S. V. Hange, A.G.P. for the Respondent No. 1 in all matters.
Shri S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 in all
matters.
CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
DATE : 29TH NOVEMBER, 2025.
FINAL ORDER :
. Heard both sides.
2. Applicants are praying for condonation of delay of 4528
days caused in preferring first appeals.
3. Learned counsel Mrs. Manjushri Narwade for the
applicants submits that by common judgment 120 references
were decided by the Reference Court. The claimants have
preferred appeals for the enhancement. Out of them in thirty
nine matters delay was condoned by the Coordinate Bench vide
order dated 15th December, 2021, which is placed on record. It is
further submitted that there are no mala fides on the part of the
applicants in preferring appeals belatedly. The delay is sought
7 88 ca 2334.25 group
to be condoned for the reasons stated in the applications.
4. The applications are contested by the respondent No.
2/Acquiring Body through affidavit in reply. It is submitted by
the leaned counsel Mr. Dande for the acquiring body that the
delay is inordinate and no satisfactory explanation is coming
forth. It is impermissible in such cases to adopt any liberal
approach. It is further submitted that the applicants had
accepted the award and for near about thirteen years no steps
were taken. The grounds mentioned in the applications are
palpably false. It is submitted that if the delay is condoned that
will cause extra burden on public exchequer in case appeals are
allowed.
5. I have gone through the applications and the affidavit in
reply. Arising out of the self same common judgment in all thirty
nine appeals have been registered by condoning delay. The order
of condonation of delay passed by the Coordinate Bench of 15 th
December, 2021 shows that on condition of forfeiture of interest
and statutory benefits, delay was condoned. It would be
discriminatory to take any other view by this Court. Judicial
discipline demands that this Court should follow the course
adopted by the Coordinate Bench.
6. Learned counsel for the acquiring body has referred to
following judgments of the Supreme Court and this Court :
8 88 ca 2334.25 group
I Shivamma (Dead) by L.Rs. Vs. Karnataka Housing Board
and others reported in MANU/SC/1262/2025.
II Pathapati Subba Reddy (Died) by L.Rs. and others Vs. The
Special Deputy Collector (LA) reported in [2024] 4 SCR
241.
III Surendra Kumar Jain Vs. Santobai and others reported in
MANU/SC/0226/2025.
IV Baljeet Singh (Dead) through L.Rs. and others Vs. State of
U.P. and others reported in (2019) 5 SCC 33.
V Esha Battacharjee Vs. Managing Committee of
Raghunathpur Nafar Academy and others reported in
(2013) 12 SCC 649.
VI Thirunagallingam Vs. Lingeswaran and others reported in
[2025] 65 SCR 253.
VII The Executive Engineer Vs. Pandharinath and others
reported in MANU/MH/1713/2018.
7. The principles laid down in above judgments have binding
force. In my considered view condonation of delay in 39 appeals
arising out of common impugned judgment is a distinguishing
factor. I am unable to give benefit of the judgments referred
above to the acquiring body. The equities can be adjusted by
imposing some cost on the applicants.
8. Applicants have shown the grounds for condonation of
delay. I do not find any mala fides on their part to prefer appeals
belatedly. It is desirable to condone the delay on certain
9 88 ca 2334.25 group
conditions. I am fortified in my view on the strength of judgment
of the Apex Court in the matter of Mohar Singh (Dead) through L.Rs.
and others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh Collector and others reported in 2024
All SCR 149. The relevant extract is as follows :
"12. Having heard learned Senior Counsel for the parties and on
perusal of the material placed on record, we are satisfied that the
appellants are entitled to seek parity with their co-villagers in the grant
of compensation for their acquired land. This Court has consistently
held in a catena of decisions that the inordinate delay in filing appeal
in compensatory matters, per se, may not be fatal as the rights and
equities between the parties can be well balanced by denying the
statutory benefits, such as interest for the delayed period. We are thus
of the considered opinion that the delay in filing the first appeal(s)
could be condoned subject to the condition that the appellants would
not be entitled to enure undue benefit for the delayed period. We grant
such indulgence in the appellant's favour also for the reason that a
batch of first appeals at the instance of other land owners was still
pending consideration before the High Court. All that the High Court
ought to have emphatically denied to the late-comers was the benefit
of interest including on the solatium, under Section 34 of the Act for
the period from the date of passing of the award by the Reference
Court till the filing of the first appeals."
9. Further reliance is placed on the judgment of the Apex
Court by the applicants in the matters of Suresh Kumar Vs. State of
Haryana and others reported in 2025(2) RCR (Civil) 743 as well as New
Okhla Industrial Development Authority Vs. Rameshwar @ Ramesh Chandra
Sharma (Dead) through Legal Heir and another reported in 2022 SCC Online
SC 1599. I am inclined to follow the principles laid down by the
Apex Court.
10. The civil applications are allowed and the delay caused in
each application shall stand condoned with a condition that the
10 88 ca 2334.25 group
applicants shall not be entitled to interest and statutory benefits
for the delayed period. In addition to the above, the applicants
shall deposit cost of Rs. 3,000/- (Rs. Three thousands only) in this
Court for every application within a period of four (04) weeks
from today, which shall be the condition precedent. Office shall
register the first appeals. Amount deposited by the applicants
shall be disbursed to the respondent No. 2/Acquiring body. The
civil applications are disposed of.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME J. ]
bsb/Nov. 25
