Gujarat High Court
Lh Of Becharbhai Lalabhai Bhagvanji ... vs Deputy Collector Jamnagar on 21 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2130/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2130 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 11321 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2517 of 2025
In
F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 11245 of 2025
==========================================================
LH OF BECHARBHAI LALABHAI BHAGVANJI VASHRAM
Versus
DEPUTY COLLECTOR JAMNAGAR & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ADITYA S PATEL(12087) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
RAHUL DAVE AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 21/11/2025
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Mr. Dave waives
service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and
2. Learned advocate Mr. Patel for the applicant submits that
the delay was caused in filing the first appeal because of
the applicant's financial incapability to arrange the legal
expenses, as well as the applicant is farmer and due to
nature of schedule, the delay of 1452 days has been
caused. Learned advocate Mr. Patel further submits that he
would not claim interest in the event of succeeding in the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2130/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
first appeal for the delayed period and therefore, he prays
that this application may be allowed.
3. Per contra, learned AGP Mr. Dave has opposed the
application for condonation of delay.
4. This Court has referred to the decision rendered by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Suresh Kumar V/s. State
of Haryana and Others reported in 2025 SCC Online SC
896, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that even
though there was long delay in filing the appeals, it was a
case of compulsory acquisition and there had been a
difference in the amount of compensation granted to some
land losers vis-a-vis others. This Court has also referred to
the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Market Committee Hodal V/s. Krishan Murari,
reported in 1996 (1) SC 311, wherein delay of 3240 days
arising from the same acquisition had been condoned. This
Court has also referred to the decision rendered by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Huchanagouda V/s.
Assistant Commissioner and Land Acquisition Officer,
reported in 2020 (19) SCC 236, wherein the Court had
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2130/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
taken into account the poverty and illiteracy of the land
loser and condoned the delay of more than 2,000 days.
While condoning the delay, the Hon'ble Apex Court had
observed that equities had to be balanced by ensuring that
the determination of market value relates back to the
preliminary notification - making sure that there is no
prejudice to the acquiring authorities, as also no undue
advantage to the land loser.
4.1. It is observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the
appellants who approached the Court with delay, would
not be granted interest for such period. Having considered
the explanation offered in the application and the
submissions made in the above paragraph No.2, this Court
is of the considered view that the application requires to be
allowed and the delay is required to be condoned. In that
background, the application is allowed.
5. It is needless to clarify that the applicants-original
claimants shall not be entitled to the interest in event of
the enhancement amount of compensation, if any, for the
interregnum period i.e. from the date of pronouncement of
the impugned judgment and award till the date of filing of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2130/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
the present appeal.
6. Copy of this order shall be placed in the docket of the first
appeal. Rule is made absolute.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
Vikramsinh Amarsinh
