Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra and its officers (applicants) filed a Civil Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking condonation of a delay of 1654 days in filing a First Appeal against the judgment and award dated 30th April 2010 passed by the Reference Court (Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad) in Land Acquisition Reference No. 4 of 2008. The Reference Court had enhanced the compensation for the acquired land of the respondents (original claimants). The applicants contended that the delay occurred due to procedural formalities, including obtaining certified copies, administrative approvals, and file movements between departments. The respondents opposed the application, arguing that the delay was inordinate and unexplained. The court examined the explanation and found that the applicants merely stated that the file was sent to various departments without providing specific dates or reasons for the delay. The court noted that the applicants did not act with due diligence and that the explanation was vague and insufficient. The court also considered the principle that even a long delay may be condoned if refusal would result in substantial injustice, but held that no such case was made out. The Reference Court's award was based on evidence, and the State did not demonstrate any grave miscarriage of justice. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for condonation of delay, and the accompanying First Appeal was also dismissed as time-barred.
Headnote
A) Limitation Act - Condonation of Delay - Section 5 - Sufficient Cause - Inordinate delay of 1654 days in filing appeal against land acquisition award - Applicants (State) offered explanation of procedural delays and file movements - Held that the explanation was not sufficient to condone such a long delay, as the applicants failed to act diligently and the delay was not properly explained (Paras 1-10).
B) Land Acquisition Act - Reference Court - Appeal against award - Delay condonation - Principles of substantial justice - Even if delay is long, court may condone if refusal would result in substantial injustice - Held that no case of substantial injustice was made out, as the Reference Court's award was based on evidence and the State did not demonstrate any grave miscarriage of justice (Paras 11-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the delay of 1654 days in filing the first appeal against the judgment and award of the Reference Court should be condoned, considering the explanation offered by the applicants and the principles governing condonation of delay.
Final Decision
The Civil Application for condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the accompanying First Appeal (FAST/29820/2015) is also dismissed as time-barred.
Law Points
- Condonation of delay
- Sufficient cause
- Inordinate delay
- Limitation Act
- 1963 Section 5
- Land Acquisition Act
- 1894 Section 18
- Reference Court
- First Appeal
- Substantial justice
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (01) 21
Civil Application No. 15013 of 2015 in FAST/29820/2015 with CA/15206/2015 in FAST/29820/2015
Mr. K.N. Lokhande (AGP for Applicants/State), Mr. R.P. Adgaonkar (Advocate for Respondents)
State of Maharashtra through Collector, Osmanabad; Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Office, Osmanabad; Executive Engineer, Osmanabad Minor Irrigation Division, Osmanabad
Murlidhar Digambar Kulkarni, Govind Digambar Kulkarni, Shripad Digamber Kulkarni, Ushabai Raghavendra Kulkarni, Gunderao Raghavendra Naichakurkar (Kulkarni) (Legal representatives of original claimant Digamber Gunderao Kulkarni)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil Application for condonation of delay in filing First Appeal against judgment and award of Reference Court in land acquisition matter.
Remedy Sought
Applicants (State) sought condonation of 1654 days delay in filing First Appeal against the Reference Court's award enhancing compensation.
Filing Reason
The applicants claimed that the delay occurred due to procedural formalities and administrative approvals required for filing the appeal.
Previous Decisions
The Reference Court (Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad) passed judgment and award dated 30th April 2010 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 4 of 2008, enhancing compensation for the acquired land.
Issues
Whether the delay of 1654 days in filing the First Appeal should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Whether the explanation offered by the applicants constitutes 'sufficient cause' for condonation of such inordinate delay.
Submissions/Arguments
Applicants argued that the delay was caused by procedural formalities, including obtaining certified copies, administrative approvals, and file movements between departments, and that the delay was not intentional.
Respondents argued that the delay was inordinate and unexplained, and that the applicants failed to act diligently, thus the application should be dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the explanation for the delay of 1654 days was vague and insufficient, lacking specific details of dates and reasons for the delay. The applicants failed to act with due diligence. Even considering the principle of substantial justice, no case was made out for condoning such inordinate delay, as the Reference Court's award was based on evidence and no grave miscarriage of justice was demonstrated.
Judgment Excerpts
The explanation offered by the applicants is vague and does not inspire confidence.
The applicants have not acted with due diligence.
No case of substantial injustice is made out.
Procedural History
The Reference Court (Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad) passed judgment and award on 30th April 2010 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 4 of 2008, enhancing compensation. The State (applicants) sought to file a First Appeal against this award. The appeal was filed with a delay of 1654 days. The applicants filed Civil Application No. 15013 of 2015 for condonation of delay. The court heard the application and dismissed it on 15th January 2018.
Acts & Sections
- Limitation Act, 1963: Section 5
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 18
