[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Rajendrasinh Jagatsinh Jadeja ... vs State Of Gujarat on 11 December, 2025
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/5342/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 5342 of
2025
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4539 of 2025
==========================================================
RAJENDRASINH JAGATSINH JADEJA MANJULABA JAGATSINH JADEJA
GUARDIAN OF RAJENDRASINH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
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, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
Date : 11/12/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE)
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service of
notice of rule on behalf of the respondent- State.
2. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 5 of
the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 697 days in preferring
the appeal against the judgment dated 11.01.2018 and Decree dated
18-01-2018 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge,
Dhoraji in group Land Acquisition Reference (LAR) Case No.9/2007
to 11/2007.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/5342/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/12/2025
undefined
3. Learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the
contents of of the application, wherein it stated that the applicant
is not much literate and is a poor small time agriculturist who is
not aware about the procedure of the court of law. Therefore also
some delay has occurred which is required to be condoned.
4. Therefore, learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court
to the reasons for which delay has occurred.
5. Learned AGP for the respondent formally opposes the grant of
application.
6. Considering the aforesaid, particularly, period of 697 days of
delay, the Court is of the view that considering the facts involved
in the case, delay cannot be treated as inordinate.
7. Considering the submissions and the contents of the para
mentioned hereinabove, the delay is also explained sufficiently.
8. A reference in this regard may be made to the judgment of
the Supreme Court in case of Sheo Raj Singh (Deceased) through
Legal Representatives and others vs/. Union of India and Another,
reported in (2023) 10 SCC 531, wherein the term "Sufficient
Cause" was interpreted and the approach of Courts while deciding
application for condonation of delay was discussed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/5342/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/12/2025
undefined
9. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent. The delay of 697 days in
preferring the appeal against the judgment dated 11.01.2018 and
Decree dated 18-01-2018 passed by the learned Additional Senior
Civil Judge, Dhoraji in group Land Acquisition Reference (LAR) Case
No.9/2007 to 11/2007 is hereby condoned.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J)
(J. L. ODEDRA, J)
PARESH SOMPURA
