Gujarat High Court
Special Land Acquisition Officer vs Pratapji Saburji on 8 December, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1648/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1648 of
2023
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 25293 of 2023
==========================================================
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
Versus
PRATAPJI SABURJI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ADITYA DAVDA, AGP for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR SHAILESH THAKORE, ADVOCATE, for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 08/12/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of present application filed u/s 5 of the Limitation Act,
the applicant has prayed to condone delay of 450 days caused in
preferring captioned First Appeal on the reasons stated in the
application.
2. Learned AGP for the applicant would submit that the present
applicant is a State authority and the delay is caused due to
administrative process which resulted into bureaucratic delay.
Learned AGP has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court
in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr.
Vs. Mrs. Katji and Ors. reported in AIR 1987 SC 1353.
3. Learned advocate for the respondent while opposing this
application, would submit that delay is not sufficiently explained and
therefore, present application may be dismissed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1648/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2023
undefined
4. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and
perused the documents on record and also perused the decisions of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Collector, Land Acquisition,
Anantnag and Anr. Vs. Mrs. Katji and Ors. reported in AIR
1987 SC 1353, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as
under:-
"1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by
lodging an appeal late.
2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a
meritorious matter being thrown out at the very
threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against
this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen
is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing
the parties.
3. "Every day's delay must be explained" does not
mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not
every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine
must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic
manner.
4. When substantial justice and technical
considerations are pitted against each other, cause of
substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other
side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being
done because of a nondeliberate delay.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1648/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2023
undefined
5. There is no presumption that delay is occasioned
deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on
account of mala fides. A litigant does not stand to
benefit by resorting to delay. In fact he runs a serious
risk.
6. It must be grasped that judiciary is respected not
on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical
grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice
and is expected to do so."
5. Applying the ratio of aforestated judgment in background of
the facts of the present case as well as considering the law laid down
by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Collector, Land
Acquisition, Anantnag (Supra), the application seeking
condonation of delay deserves consideration.
6. In the result, present Application is allowed and delay caused
in preferring captioned First Appeal is hereby condoned. Rule is
made absolute. No order as to costs.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
VATSAL
