Gujarat High Court
Decd Kanabi Lumbabhai Pragabhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 29 November, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1657/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1657 of
2023
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 29936 of 2023
==========================================================
DECD KANABI LUMBABHAI PRAGABHAI THROUGH LH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RAKESH R PATEL(3239) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4
MR ADITYA D. DAVDA, AGP ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO
GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 29/11/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. This application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation
Act for condonation of delay of 2783 days in preferring the
First Appeal.
2. Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Aditya
D. Davda appears on advance copy, waives the service of
notice of Rule for respondent-State.
3. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
4. The learned advocate for the applicants has submitted
that the main reason of delay is that there was an outbreak of
Covid-19. The learned advocate for the applicants has
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1657/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2023
undefined
submitted that the applicants are an illiterate agriculturists and
they are not conversant with the law and they does not have
sufficient legal knowledge which could enable them to file an
appropriate appeal within the stipulated period and therefore,
the applicants could not file an appeal within the stipulated
time period.
5. Learned Advocate for the applicants has produced
decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of K.
Subbarayadu and others Versus The Special Collector
(Land Acquisition) reported in 2017 (12) SCC 840 and
would submit that considering the law laid down in
aforementioned case, the applicants are not claiming their
right for the interest upon the enhanced compensation, if any,
for the delay period. It is further submitted that the delay is not
intentional and there was no lethargy on the part of the
applicants.
6. Per contra, there is an objection on the part of the
learned AGP that the delay has not been sufficiently explained
and therefore, present application may be dismissed.
7. Applying the ratio of aforesaid 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 K.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1657/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2023
undefined
Subbarayadu (supra), the application seeking condonation of
delay deserves consideration. However, the claimants would
not be entitled to claim interest on the enhanced amount of
compensation, if any, during the delay period.
8. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the
delay has sufficiently been explained, therefore, this
application is allowed subject to the condition that the
applicant - claimant shall not be entitled to claim interest on
the period of delay caused in preferring the First Appeal on
enhanced amount of award, if any. Rule is made absolute to
the aforesaid extent.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
B. J. Thaker
