Gujarat High Court
Madhubhai Kanjibhai Khatara vs State Of Gujarat on 25 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/6183/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.
6183 of 2024
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 32916 of 2024
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6186 of 2024
In
F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 31663 of 2024
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6216 of 2024
In
F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 32462 of 2024
=============================================
MADHUBHAI KANJIBHAI KHATARA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR KRUSHNAKANT D PATEL(10632) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR TEJAS P SATTA(3149) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
Mr. Shivam Dixit. Asst. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
KAASH K THAKKAR(7332) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 25/04/2025
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Tejas Satta, learned advocate for the
applicant - proposed appellant. Mr. Kaash Thakkar, learned
advocate has appeared on behalf of the respondent no.3 and
Mr. Dixit, learned Assistant Government Pleader has appeared
on behalf of respondent State Authority.
2. The Civil Application No.6183 of 2024 is filed seeking
condonation of delay of 1668 days in preferring captioned
First Appeal challenging the impugned judgment and award
dated 29.01.2020 passed in Land Reference Case No.34 of
2013 and allied matters (Main Land Reference Case No.31 of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/6183/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
2013) by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Amreli,
whereby, the Reference preferred by the present claimant
under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act seeking
enhancement of compensation was rejected.
3. The Civil Application No.6186 of 2024 is filed seeking
condonation of delay of 1917 days in preferring captioned
First Appeal challenging the impugned judgment and award
dated 02.05.2019 passed in Land Reference Case No.9 of
2013 and allied matters (Main Land Reference Case No.4 of
2013) by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Amreli,
whereby, the Reference preferred by the present claimant
under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act seeking
enhancement of compensation was rejected.
4. The Civil Application No.6216 of 2024 is filed seeking
condonation of delay of 1936 days in preferring captioned
First Appeal challenging the impugned judgment and award
dated 02.05.2019 passed in Land Reference Case No.22 of
2013 and allied matters (Main Land Reference Case No.4 of
2013) by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Amreli,
whereby, the Reference preferred by the present claimant
under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act seeking
enhancement of compensation was rejected.
5. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the applicant-
original claimant that the aforesaid common impugned
judgment and award was challenged by the other claimants of
the same group with an application seeking condonation of
delay by way of an appeal under Section 54 of the Land
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/6183/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
Acquisition Act, which was registered as First Appeal No.4209
of 2022 and allied matters. The attention of this Court was
invited to the order dated 06.12.2023 passed by the
Coordinate Bench, whereby, upon hearing the respective
parties, the Coordinate Bench has accepted the case of the
claimants and has remanded the matter back to the Reference
Court by directing to decide it afresh without being influenced
by its earlier order. The necessary directions were also issued
to expedite the hearing. It was further clarified that claimant
shall not be entitled for any interest from the date of the
impugned judgment and award till the date of passing of such
order. While placing reliance upon the aforesaid order,
learned advocate has submitted that the present applicant-
original claimant who was small time agriculturist and are not
aware about the procedure of law. The applicants were not
award about the fact that the remedy of appeal is available.
On the other hand, their lands have been acquired and have
not provided with the just and proper compensation. It was
further submitted that their main source of income is
agricultural income and they were not in a position to manage
the funds for filing of appeal. By making aforesaid
submissions, learned advocate has submitted that upon
realizing the fact that the appeals preferred by the claimants
have been allowed by this Court and matters have been
remanded back for afresh consideration, they have
immediately made the efforts to arrange the funds to prefer
the captioned appeal, however, in the aforesaid exercise the
delay has crept in. Learned advocate has therefore, submitted
that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the
Court may take liberal approach and applicants may be put to
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/6183/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
terms and conditions, however the Court may condone the
delay in the larger interest of justice. The dismissal of the
present application solely on the ground of delay would take
away right of the applicant to present their case for
enhancement on merits.
6. The reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in this regard. The attention of this Court was
invited to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Dhiraj Singh v. State of Haryana (2014) 14 SCC 127 :
(2015) 1 SCC (Civ) 236 as well as in the case of Imrat Lal v.
Land Acquisition Collector & Ors. (2014) 15 SCC 127 whereby
the Hon'ble Supreme Court had condoned huge delay and has
observed that the Courts are expected to take liberal
approach in matters pertaining to Land Acquisition Act. The
attention of this Court was also invited to the fact that in the
aforesaid matters the ground of parity on grant of
compensation was the core issue which was considered while
condoning the delay. Lastly, learned advocate has also placed
reliance upon the Three Judges Bench Judgment in the case of
Ningappa Thotappa Angadi Dead Thr. LRs. V/s Special Land
Acquisition Officer and Another, reported in (2020) 19 SCC
6. Mr. Kaash Thakkar learned advocate appearing for the
respondent no.3 authority has placed reliance upon the
affidavit in reply and has vehemently objected to the
condonation of delay. Learned advocate has submitted that
pursuant to the order of remand, the Reference Court has
proceeded to decide the reference in favour of the claimants
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/6183/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
which is subject matter of challenge in appeal at the instance
of the respondent Panchayat. He has further pointed out that
in fact the Reference Court committed serious error in
entertaining such proceeding without appreciating the fact
that specific directions were issued by this Court while
remanding the matter to deposit the requisite Court fees and
having not complied with such direction, at the outset,
Reference was required to be rejected. He has therefore,
submitted that he has good case on merits in the appeal which
is pending consideration before this Court. Even otherwise,
according to him, the present applicants being fence-sitter,
they are not entitled to such relief of remand having
approached this Court belatedly.
7. The attention of this Court was invited to the judgment
of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pathupati Subba
Reddy (Died) by L.Rs. & Ors. v. The Special Deputy
Collector (LA) (2024 INSC 286) where the Court following
the earlier judgment in the case of Basawaraj and Another
V/s Special Land Acquisition Officer reported in (2011) 4
SCC 316 has held that the term 'sufficient cause' means an
adequate and enough reasons which prevented the applicant
to approach the court within stipulated period of limitation
and in the case where the party is found to be negligent or for
want of bona fide or has not acted diligently or remained
inactive, the same cannot be a justified ground to condone the
delay. It was also held that in absence of any sufficient cause
being made out, the Courts are not justified in condoning the
delay by imposing any condition whatsoever. He has therefore
submitted that merely because the other affected land owners
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/6183/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
have succeeded in receiving the enhanced compensation, the
same would not entitle the present applicants who had not
approached this Court within a stipulated period of limitation
by way of appeal. Even otherwise, the merits of the case
cannot be examined at the stage of condonation of delay. He
has therefore objected to grant of condonation of delay, even
by imposing condition of waiving interest.
8. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the
learned advocates for the respective parties, it is an
undisputed fact that the impugned judgment and award in the
present appeals has been quashed and set aside at the
instance of the similarly situated claimant whereby, the
Coordinate Bench has remanded the proceedings back to the
Reference Court. It is also an undisputed fact that in the first
round, Reference at the instance of the claimants have not
been entertained by recording the fact that the claimants have
failed to produce on record the evidence, however the
Coordinate Bench in appeal upon appreciation of the record
has noticed that the list of the documents were produced by
the applicants. The same has not been taken into
consideration and has therefore, remanded the proceedings
back to the Reference Court. It is further noticed that the
aforesaid order has in fact been implemented inasmuch as
after the remand order, the Reference Court has decided the
Reference in favour of the original claimants. The present
applicants being part of the aforesaid group of original
reference proceedings and similarly situated, in the opinion of
this Court, are entitled to similar treatment though they have
approached this Court belatedly, the interest of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/6183/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
respondent authority can be protected by putting the
applicants on the same terms and conditions as directed by
the Coordinate Bench while remanding the matter. The
present claimants are also held not entitled for any interest
from the date of impugned judgment and award till the date
of passing of such order. Apt would be to take into
consideration the relevant observations of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in this regard.
9. Applying the principles laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the various decisions as relied upon by the
learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it can
be noticed that the Hon'ble Supreme Court right from the
decision in the case of Dhiraj Singh (supra) and in the case
of Imrat Lal (supra) which has later been affirmed by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ningappa Thotappa
Angadi (supra) which is Three Judges Bench Judgment has
consistently opined that where the parties are identically
situated and in one set of appeals, they are found to be
entitled to enhanced amount of compensation then there can
be no reason to give a different treatment to the applicants
who approached belatedly. So far as reliance placed by the
learned AGP on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
does not refer to the Three Judges Bench judgment in the case
of Ningappa Thotappa Angadi (supra) as relied upon by
the learned advocate for the applicant. At the same time, the
Courts have opined that the equity can be balanced by
denying interest for the period for which they did not
approached this Court. The broad principle which appealed to
the Hon'ble Supreme Court is that the substantive rights of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/6183/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
the affected land owners should not be allowed to be defeated
on the technical grounds of taking hyper technical view of
self-imposed limitations. The court has therefore held that in
the matter of compensation for land acquisition, the approach
of the court has to be pragmatic and not pandemic.
10. Considering the aforesaid legal position and noticing
the fact that the impugned judgment and award under
challenge has already been quashed and set aside in the
cognate appeals and aforesaid order of the Coordinate Bench
being not further taken in appeal before the higher forum, this
Court is inclined to exercise its discretion in condoning the
delay caused in preferring the captioned First Appeals.
Hence, delay caused in preferring respective captioned
appeals are hereby condoned on condition that applicants-
original claimants shall not be entitled to interest for the
interregnum period from the date of passing of the impugned
order till the date of passing of the order in the captioned
appeals. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent in each
of the applications.
11. Registry is directed to register the First Appeals and
give Pakka Number. Let, First Appeals be notified for
admission hearing on 01.05.2025. Registry is directed to
reflect the name of learned advocate Mr. Kaash Thakkar who
has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent no.3.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
RATHOD KAUSHIKSINH
