Laljibhai Vallabhabhai Radadiya vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 305 Guj

          C/CA/4148/2019                                       ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                  R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4148 of 2019

                    In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 25427 of 2019

==========================================================
                    LALJIBHAI VALLABHABHAI RADADIYA
                                  Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TUSHAR L SHETH(3920) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
MR. ROHAN SHAH, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER(1) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA

                             Date : 11/01/2021

                        ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)

Heard learned advocate Mr. Tushar Sheth for the applicants and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Rohan Shah for the respondent State.

2. The applicants-the original claimants have sought to prefer the appeal against judgment and award of the Reference Court dated 4.2.2019 in Land Reference Case No. 223 of 2005 as the applicants are aggrieved with the amount of compensation awarded. In preferring the said appeal, delay of 92 days has taken place, to condone which the present application is filed.

3. It is stated in order to explain the delay that after the judgment and award by the Reference Court was delivered, after taking advice of the

C/CA/4148/2019 ORDER

advocate at the local level, the applicants came to Ahmedabad to contact the advocate. There was summer vacation at that time. The papers were handed over to the advocate to prefer the appeal. It is stated that despite the applicants were vigilant enough and intending to prefer the appeal right from the beginning, time was consumed before the the appeal could be filed resulting into 92 days delay.

4. Having regard to the principle that delay is to be approached leniently in order to enable the litigant to contest the case on merit and further considering that occurrence of delay cannot be attributed to the applicants, sufficient cause is made out.

5. Resultantly, delay is condoned. The application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J)

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) C.M. JOSHI