Gujarat High Court
Kusumben Rahimbhai Gaji W/O Daud ... vs Deputy Collector, ... on 1 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/776/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 776 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 36635 of 2024
==========================================================
KUSUMBEN RAHIMBHAI GAJI W/O DAUD KULSUMBIBI ABDUL KAIYUM
Versus
DEPUTY COLLECTOR, REHABILITATION/LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER &
ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR D V KANSARA(7498) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RAHUL DAVE, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 01/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. D. V. Kansara for the applicant and
learned AGP Mr. Rahul Dave for the respondents.
2. This application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act,
1963 for praying to condone the delay of 2616 days which has
taken place in filing of the first appeal.
3. It is submitted by learned advocate for the applicant that the
applicant is aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned
judgment and award dated 27.7.2017 passed in old LAR Case
No.458 of 2008 (New LAR Case No.634 of 2017) passed by the
Principal Senior Civil Judge, Lunavada. It is contended that
request of the applicant is for remand of the matter on the
ground that despite the non-agricultural land of applicant was
acquired, the learned Reference Court enhanced the
compensation while considering the acquired land as an
agricultural land. The judgment and award was assailed by the
State by preferring First Appeal No.3071 of 2023 which came to
be dismissed by this Court on 19-7-2023. The claimant received
the compensation in the month of December 2023 and at that
time applicant found that the learned Reference Court has
committed an error by considering the land as an agricultural
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/776/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/09/2025
undefined
land. Through oversight, the claimant could not file cross-
objection at the relevant point of time. It is contended that
there is a gross-error committed by the learned Reference
Court in not granting the compensation of the acquired land by
considering the land as non-agricultural land. The claimant has
a good case both; on facts as well as under law for the
enhancement of compensation dated 29.8.2025 of the claimant
is placed on record which is taken on record. It is contended by
learned Reference Court for the applicant that the claimant is
ready and willing to waive the interest for the period between
the date of judgment and award till the date of filing of the
present first appeal. It is contended that if the delay is not
condoned, the applicant would suffer great financial loss. The
claimant has already lost a valuable land in the acquisition
proceedings. This being a sufficient cause common, delay may
be condoned. No other submissions are made except the
above.
4. Per contra, Learned AGP has contended that the claimant was
in the knowledge of a fact that the learned Reference Court has
awarded compensation in the year 2017. Even when the State
assailed the impugned judgment and award, the applicant
could have filed appropriate proceedings challenging the
impugned judgment and award by remaining silent and
inactive, the applicant has accepted the award and now after a
period of 2616 days, the claimant has realized that the
compensation awarded is not proper. No other submissions are
made except the above.
5. I have considered submissions canvassed by learned advocates
for the respective parties and also perused the application.
6. It appears from the impugned judgment and award and also
from the averments made in the application that the learned
Reference Court while awarding compensation has considered
the land in question as an agricultural land. However, the land
in question is non-agricultural land. The land in question being a
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/776/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/09/2025
undefined
non-agricultural land could not be controverted by learned AGP.
Thus, it appears that the learned Reference Court has not
appreciated the nature of land in question. The fact that the
claimant had knowledge about such error since 2017, the year
in which the impugned award came to be passed can be
compensated by imposing a penalty of waiver of interest. The
claimant has also filed an undertaking dated 29.8.2025 and has
declared on oath that she is ready and willing to waive the
interest amount for the period between 27.7.2017, the day on
which the judgment and award came to be passed, till the date
of filing of the first appeal, i.e. 23.12.2024. Such undertaking is
taken on record. However, the record reveals that the date of
presentation of the appeal is 1.1.2025. Reasons assigned in the
application for condonation of delay sounds reasonable and in
view of such reasons, there is a valid cause for challenging the
impugned award by the applicant. Considering a peculiar fact
found in the present case, delay is condoned on a condition that
the claimant shall not be entitled to interest from 27.7.2017 till
1-1-2025 on enhanced compensation, if any, awarded by this
court.
7. This application is allowed in above terms. No order as to costs.
Direct Service is permitted.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
vk
