Case Note & Summary
The judgment pertains to a batch of civil applications filed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Unit 1 and another (the State) under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking condonation of a delay of 2014 days in filing first appeals against a common judgment and award dated 13.12.2019 and 23.12.2019 respectively, passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijapur, District Mehsana, in land acquisition reference cases. The respondent in each application is Patel Ramabhai Becharbhai, the landowner. The State argued that the delay occurred due to administrative procedures, including obtaining legal opinion, sanction, and approval from various departments. The court noted that the explanation was vague and did not account for each day's delay. The court held that the State, like any other litigant, must show sufficient cause for the entire period of delay. The court found that the reasons given were not cogent and that the State had not acted diligently. Consequently, the court dismissed all the civil applications, refusing to condone the delay. The court also observed that the first appeals were therefore barred by limitation and could not be entertained.
Headnote
A) Limitation Act - Condonation of Delay - Section 5 - Sufficient Cause - The applicant, being the State, sought condonation of 2014 days delay in filing first appeal against land acquisition award. The court held that the explanation for delay was vague and lacked cogent reasons for each day's delay. The mere fact that the applicant is the State does not entitle it to a liberal approach if the delay is not properly explained. The court dismissed the applications, finding no sufficient cause. (Paras 1-10)
B) Land Acquisition - Delay in Filing Appeal - Condonation - The delay of 2014 days was attributed to internal administrative procedures and file movements. The court found that the explanation was not satisfactory and that the state had not shown due diligence. The court emphasized that the Limitation Act applies equally to the State and that negligence of officers cannot be a ground for condonation. (Paras 2-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the delay of 2014 days in filing the first appeal against the land acquisition award should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, when the state has not provided sufficient cause for the delay.
Final Decision
All the civil applications are dismissed. The delay of 2014 days is not condoned. Consequently, the first appeals are barred by limitation and are not entertained.
Law Points
- Condonation of delay
- Section 5 of Limitation Act
- 1963
- Sufficient cause
- Each day's delay must be explained
- Liberal approach in state applications
- Negligence of officers not sufficient ground
Case Details
2026 LawText (GUJ) (01) 644
R/Civil Application (For Condonation of Delay) No. 5199 of 2025 and connected matters
Ms. Himani Shah, Mr. Parth Patel, Mr. Bhavesh Desai (Asst. Government Pleaders for applicants); Rule served for respondents
Special Land Acquisition Officer, Unit 1 & Anr.
Patel Ramabhai Becharbhai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing first appeals against a land acquisition award.
Remedy Sought
The applicants (State) sought condonation of 2014 days delay in filing first appeals challenging the judgment and award dated 13.12.2019 and 23.12.2019 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijapur.
Filing Reason
The applicants claimed that the delay occurred due to administrative procedures such as obtaining legal opinion, sanction, and approval from various departments.
Previous Decisions
The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijapur, passed the judgment and award on 13.12.2019 and 23.12.2019 in land acquisition reference cases.
Issues
Whether the delay of 2014 days in filing the first appeal should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Submissions/Arguments
The applicants (State) submitted that the delay was caused by administrative procedures and internal file movements, and that the State should be given a liberal approach.
The respondents (landowners) argued that the delay was inordinate and not sufficiently explained, and that the applications should be dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the applicant must show sufficient cause for the entire period of delay. The State is not entitled to a liberal approach if the delay is not properly explained. Each day's delay must be accounted for with cogent reasons. Vague explanations and negligence of officers do not constitute sufficient cause.
Judgment Excerpts
The present application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a delay of 2014 days in filing the first appeal challenging the judgment dated 13.12.2019 and the award dated 23.12.2019 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijapur, District Mehsana, in Land Acquisition Reference.
The explanation for delay is vague and does not provide cogent reasons for each day's delay. The mere fact that the applicant is the State does not entitle it to a liberal approach if the delay is not properly explained.
Procedural History
The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijapur, passed the judgment and award on 13.12.2019 and 23.12.2019. The State filed the present civil applications in 2025 seeking condonation of 2014 days delay in filing first appeals against that judgment and award. The applications were heard by the High Court of Gujarat and dismissed by common judgment on 19.01.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Limitation Act, 1963: Section 5
