Vitthalbhai Harjibhai vs Deputy Collector And Special Land ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2485 Guj

     C/CA/338/2022                                ORDER DATED: 04/03/2022




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                     R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 338 of 2022

                     In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 9866 of 2020

==========================================================
                  VITTHALBHAI HARJIBHAI
                         Versus
DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND
               RAHABILITATION (IRRIGATION)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TEJAS P SATTA(3149) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR SOAHAM JOSHI AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE

                              Date : 04/03/2022

                                ORAL ORDER

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned AGP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent.

2. Heard Mr. Tejas P. Satta, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned AGP for the respondent.

3. The applicant has preferred present application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 629 days which has occurred in preferring First Appeal to assail the impugned judgment and award of the Reference Court.

C/CA/338/2022 ORDER DATED: 04/03/2022

4. Mr. Tejas P. Satta, learned advocate for the applicant submits that the delay is explained in paragraph Nos. 3 to 13 of the present application. He submits that the applicant is rustic agriculturist who is not aware of the integrity of law and only after receiving proper legal advise, he could file the appeal however, in the process delay is occurred. He submits that at no point of time the applicant abandoned his right to pursue the remedy of appeal. He, therefore, urges that the delay which has occurred in preferring appeal may be condoned.

5. Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned AGP for the respondent submits that the delay is not properly explained in the application. He, further submits that ignorance of law is not an excuse for condoning delay of 629 days. He therefore, urges that the delay may not be condoned.

6. I have considered the submissions by the learned advocates for the parties and I have perused the averments made in the present application for explaining the delay.

7. It appears from the averments made in the application that the applicant agriculturist whose land is acquired for public purpose was not properly advised after the pronouncement of the impugned judgment and award about appeal remedy available to him. Moreover, the delay is of 629 days and therefore, I am of the view that for the reasons stated in the application, the delay

C/CA/338/2022 ORDER DATED: 04/03/2022

needs to be condoned to enable the applicant to have a chance to get his appeal decided on merits.

8. For the foregoing reasons the application succeeds and is hereby allowed. The delay of 629 days caused in preferring First Appeal to assail the impugned judgment and award of the Reference Court is hereby condoned.

9. The application stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute.

(A.G.URAIZEE, J) SURESH SOLANKI