Gujarat High Court
Chaturbhai Shivabhai Patel Expired ... vs Special Land Acquisition Officer on 6 February, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1431/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/02/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1431 of
2023
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3655 of 2022
================================================================
CHATURBHAI SHIVABHAI PATEL EXPIRED (THROUGH HIS LEGAL
HEIRS)
Versus
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
================================================================
Appearance:
DECEASED LITIGANT for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.PINANK J RAIYANI(10166) for the Applicant(s) No. 1.1,1.2
MS FORAM U TRIVEDI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR RUTVIJ S OZA(5594) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 06/02/2024
ORAL ORDER
Rule. Learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf
of the respondent No.1.
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Mrunal Dholaria for learned
advocate Mr. Pinank J. Raiyani for applicants, learned Assistant
Government Pleader Ms. Foram U. Trivedi for respondent No.1 and
learned advocate Mr. Rutvij S. Oza for respondent No.2.
2. This application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act,
1963 for condonation of delay of 937 days in preferring the First
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1431/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/02/2024
undefined
Appeal.
3. Learned advocate for applicants has placed on record the order
dated 23.11.2022 passed in Civil Application No.3090 of 2022 in
First Appeal No.3656 of 2022 and allied matters and the order dated
13.04.2023 passed in the First Appeal No.4832 of 2022, which are
taken on record.
4. Learned advocate for the applicants has submitted that the said
two First Appeals are arising out of the same group of matters out of
which the present First Appeal is arising. Learned advocate for the
applicants has further submitted that main reason of delay is that
applicants were not made aware of the impugned order till the year
2019 and upon gaining knowledge of the impugned order,
considerable time was consumed in seeking legal advice to file an
Appeal.
5. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Foram
U. Trivedi for respondent No.1 and learned advocate Mr. Rutvij S.
Oza for respondent No.2 have objected the application on the ground
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1431/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/02/2024
undefined
that the reasons assigned in the application for condoning the delay
are not sufficient.
6. Having heard learned advocates for the parties and considering
the submissions of the parties, it appears that the applicant has
sufficiently explained cause for delay, the present application,
therefore, requires to be allowed.
7. So far as the interest aspect is concerned, the principle laid
down by the Apex Court in the case of K. Subbarayudu vs. The
Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) reported in (2017)
12 SCC 840, is worth referring to. Also, the statement made by the
learned advocate for the applicants that the applicants - claimants
will not claim interest for the period of delay, requires to be
considered. Paragraph 13 of the said judgment, reads thus:
"13. When the court concerned has exercised its discretion
either condoning or declining to condone the delay,
normally the superior court will not interfere in exercise of
such discretion. The true guide is whether the litigant has
acted with due diligence. Since the appellants/claimants
are the agriculturists whose lands were acquired and
when similarly situated agriculturists were given a higher
rate compensation, there is no reason to decline the same
to the of appellants. Merely on the ground of delay such
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/1431/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/02/2024
undefined
benefit cannot be denied to the appellants. The interest of
justice would be served by declining the interest on the
enhanced compensation and also on the solatium and
other statutory benefits for the period of delay."
8. In view of the explanation offered and the principle laid down
by the Apex Court, so also the fact that the applicants, have agreed
for waiving of the interest for the delayed period, this Court is of the
opinion that the delay of 937 days caused in preferring the captioned
First Appeal, deserves to be condoned and is accordingly condoned
on a condition that the applicants - claimants will not claim interest
for the period of delay.
9. The present Civil Application is allowed. Rule is made
absolute. No order as to costs.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
Vikramsinh Amarsinh
