Gujarat High Court
Diwaliben Nathabhai (Expired) vs Special Land Acquisition Officer on 14 February, 2025
Author: Sangeeta K. Vishen
Bench: Sangeeta K. Vishen
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/917/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 917 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 36854 of 2024
==========================================================
DIWALIBEN NATHABHAI (EXPIRED) & ORS.
Versus
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KRUSHNAKANT D PATEL(10632) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
MR TEJAS P SATTA(3149) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
MS FORAM TRIVEDI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA
Date : 14/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN)
By this application, the applicants have prayed for condoning
the delay of 1974 days caused in preferring the captioned First
Appeal.
2. Mr Tejas P. Satta, learned advocate for the applicants,
submitted that as the applicants are semi-literate and full time
agriculturists, unaware about the nuances of the procedural aspect
of challenging the judgments, steps could not be taken. Also, other
claimants, have approached this Court, challenging the judgment
dated 26.04.2019 and decree dated 01.05.2019 passed in Land
Acquisition Reference no.52 of 2003. Certain details were procured
and the applicants, thereafter, started taking steps for the purpose
of preferring the appeal. It is submitted that the applicants being
small time agriculturists and mainly dependent on agricultural
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/917/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025
undefined
income and in absence of any other source of income, it was difficult
for the applicants to have taken steps for the purpose of filing an
appeal. Order dated 12.01.2023 passed in Civil Application no.3428
of 2022 in F/First Appeal no.27050 of 2021, is placed on record. It is
submitted that the said First Appeal is arising out of the Land
Acquisition Reference no.52 of 2003; whereas, the case on hand,
pertains to Land Acquisition Reference no.51 of 2003.
3. Mr Tejas Satta, learned advocate, has stated at bar that the
applicants, shall not claim interest for the delayed period, if this
Court were to allow the First Appeal of the applicants.
4. Ms Foram Trivedi, learned Assistant Government Pleader
submitted that the delay is huge; however, considering the fact that
the applicants, shall not be claiming interest for the delayed period
if the First Appeal were to be allowed by this Court, appropriate
order be passed.
5. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties.
6. Issue rule, returnable forthwith. Ms Foram Trivedi, learned
Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of rule on
behalf of the respondents.
7. The applicants are small time agriculturists and mainly
dependent on the agricultural income. Besides, they being semi-
literate, were unaware about the nuances of the legal proceedings
and the repercussion of not filing the appeal in time. Immediately,
when it came to their knowledge that other similarly situated
claimants have preferred an appeal, steps have been taken. In the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/917/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/02/2025
undefined
process, there occurred a delay of 1974 days.
8. Besides, it is declared before this Court at bar that the
applicants in the event they succeed in the First Appeal, shall not
claim interest for the delayed period, if the amount of compensation
is enhanced.
9. Pertinently, F/First Appeal no.27050 of 2021, has been
preferred wherein, there was a delay, which has been condoned by
the co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 12.01.2023. The said Land
Acquisition Reference no.52 of 2003 is arising out of the self-same
impugned judgment.
10. Considering the explanation offered so also the principle laid
down in the case of Dhiraj Singh (D) through Lrs. Etc. vs. Haryana
State & Ors. etc. reported in (2014) 14 SCC 127 and the fact that
the statement is made by Mr Tejas P. Satta, learned advocate on
behalf of the applicants, that all the applicants declare before this
Court about the aspect of not claiming the interest on the enhanced
compensation for the period of delay, the delay of 1974 days caused
in filing the captioned First Appeal deserves to be condoned and is
hereby condoned.
11. Civil Application succeeds and is accordingly, allowed. Rule is
made absolute. No order as to costs.
(SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J)
(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J)
BINOY B PILLAI
