Gujarat High Court
Dobariya Babubhai Chanabhai vs The Deputy Collector Land Acquisition ... on 21 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/949/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 949 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3015 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 950 of 2025
In
F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3358 of 2025
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3962 of 2025
In
F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2993 of 2025
==========================================================
DOBARIYA BABUBHAI CHANABHAI
Versus
THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION AND REHABILITATION &
ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR GM AMIN(124) 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
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Mr. Dave waives
service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondents.
2. Learned advocate Mr. Amin for the applicant submits that
in the common land acquisition proceedings, the other first
appeals which are filed along with application for
condonation of delay of similarly days, i.e., 1798 days,
where delay is condoned by this Court vide its order dated
23.04.2025. Learned advocate Mr. Amin submits that,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/949/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
considering the explanation offered by the claimants, the
matters were admitted and pending for the final
adjudication. Learned advocate Mr. Amin submits that the
applicant would not claim the interest for the interregnum
period, i.e., from the date of the award till the date of filing
the application 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/949/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
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
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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/949/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/11/2025
undefined
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
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
