Gujarat High Court
Thakor Bhikhaji Amthaji Through Heirs ... vs Special Land Acquisition Officer on 6 August, 2021
Author: N.V.Anjaria
Bench: N.V.Anjaria
C/CA/1121/2021 ORDER DATED: 06/08/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1121 of 2021
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 10080 of 2021
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1122 of 2021
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1123 of 2021
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1124 of 2021
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1125 of 2021
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1126 of 2021
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1127 of 2021
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1128 of 2021
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1129 of 2021
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1130 of 2021
With
R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1131 of 2021
==========================================================
CHAUDHARI KESHABHAI SENDHABHAI
Versus
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AV PRAJAPATI(672) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS.DIVYANGNA JHALA, AGP and MR MANRAJ BAROT, AGP(99) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
Date : 06/08/2021
ORAL ORDER
All the captioned applications seeking condonation of delay are filed in the First Appeals arising out of common judgment and award dated 30.8.2011 of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar in Land Reference Case No.357 of 2006 to 384 A of 2006 in which they are respectively filed.
1.1 In the facts of the case, and with consent of learned Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 08 10:34:39 IST 2021 C/CA/1121/2021 ORDER DATED: 06/08/2021
advocates appearing for the parties, all the applications were heard together to be treated for disposal by this order.
2. Rule in each of the applications returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Manraj Barot waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents in Civil Application No.1121 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10080 of 2021, Civil Application No.1122 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10082 of 2021, Civil Application No.1123 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10084 of 2021, Civil Application No.1124 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10086 of 2021, Civil Application No.1125 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10088 of 2021 and Ms.Divyangna Jhala waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents in Civil Application No.1126 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10090 of 2021, Civil Application No.1127 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10092 of 2021, Civil Application No.1128 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10062 of 2021, Civil Application No.1129 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10064 of 2021, Civil Application No.1130 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10060 of 2021, Civil Application No.1131 of 2021 in First Appeal No.10068 of 2021.
3. Delay of 3049 days has taken place in preferring the First Appeals. For instance, the Civil Application captioned No.1121 of 2021 is in First Appeal No.10080 of 2021 which corresponds to the common judgment and award in so far as it relates to Land Reference Case No.363 of 2006.
3.1 The details of the respective cases are tabularized herein below.
Sr.Nos. Civil Applications First Appeals Land Reference
Cases
1 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.363 of
Page 2 of 5
Downloaded on : Wed Sep 08 10:34:39 IST 2021
C/CA/1121/2021 ORDER DATED: 06/08/2021
No.1121 of 2021 No.10080 of 2021 2006
2 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.364 of
No.1122 of 2021 No.10082 of 2021 2006
3 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.365 of
No.1123 of 2021 No.10084 of 2021 2006
4 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.366 of
No.1124 of 2021 No.10086 of 2021 2006
5 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.368 of
No.1125 of 2021 No.10088 of 2021 2006
6 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.373 of
No.1126 of 2021 No.10090 of 2021 2006
7 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.374 of
No.1127 of 2021 No.10092 of 2021 2006
8 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.375 of
No.1128 of 2021 No.10062 of 2021 2006
9 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.376 of
No.1129 of 2021 No.10064 of 2021 2006
10 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.380 of
No.1130 of 2021 No.10066 of 2021 2006
11 Civil Application First Appeal L.A.R. No.384 of
No.1131 of 2021 No.10068 of 2021 2006
4. It is the case that the compensation awarded in the instance case was deposited very late. It is also a factor on account of which the applicants could not proceed to prefer appeal as had financial constrain.
4.1 Regarding passage of time in preferring the appeal, it is further stated that respondent had preferred First Appeal No.2293 of 2013 against the impugned judgment and award which was dismissed by this Court on 2.9.2013 and the judgment and award of the Reference Court was confirmed. At that time, the applicant had not filed any cross objection. As the judgment and award was confirmed, it is stated, that the applicant had no hope for enhancement in the compensation.
Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 08 10:34:39 IST 2021C/CA/1121/2021 ORDER DATED: 06/08/2021 4.2 It is further stated, at that time, the Reference had relied
on the judgment in respect of the the village Mansa. The land under present acquisition are in the village Solaiya Taluka Visnagar District Mehsana. The judgment and award in respect of the Mansa village land was taken to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court enhanced the compensation. It was further submitted that the same will have bearing to the interest of the applicants in respect of the entitlement to compensation for their land acquired situated at village Solaiya. Having came to know that the compensation is enhanced as above and in that view, all the applicants would be entitled to more compensation, present appeals were decided to be preferred.
4.3 Learned advocate for the applicants relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in K. Subbarayudu and Others Vs. The Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) [(2017) 12 SCC 840] and also in Dhiraj Singh Vs. State of Haryana and Others (2014) 14 SCC 127 wherein the Supreme Court has condoned delay which was large in terms of days in preferring the appeal against the land acquisition cases.
4.4 The prayer for condonation was opposed by learned Assistant Government Pleader.
4.5 Learned advocate for the applicants made a statement that if the delay is condoned, the claimants- applicants shall not claim interest for the delayed period. It is submitted that the applicants have no objection if such condition is imposed as was imposed by the Supreme Court in K. Subbarayudu and Others (supra).
Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 08 10:34:39 IST 2021C/CA/1121/2021 ORDER DATED: 06/08/2021
5. In the totality of facts, sufficient cause said to have been made out. The delay deserves to be condoned. At the same time, in the facts and circumstances of the case and as per the statement made by learned advocate for the applicants, condition is required to be imposed on each of the applicants- claimants that they shall not claim any interest for the delayed period in respect of the enhanced compensation, in the event, the appeal is allowed.
6. All the applicants shall file such undertaking on oath to the effect as above that they will not claim any interest for the delayed period if they partly or fully succeeds in this appeal, within three weeks from today before this Court.
7. On the aforesaid condition, delay is condoned in each case. The present applications are allowed. Rule is made absolute in the said terms in all the applications.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J) Manshi Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 08 10:34:39 IST 2021