IMPORTANT POINT
Restoration of Special Civil Suit – Entertaining application filed at behest of a stranger for condonation of delay in filing application for restoration of subject suit is totally unsustainable in law.

1. Leave granted.

2. The present appeal challenges the judgment dated 14th December 2022, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (for short, “High Court”) in Civil Revision Application No. 269 of 2022, whereby the High Court dismissed the revision application filed by the appellants herein, challenging the order dated 4th May 2022, passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Thane, (for short, “trial court”) in Civil Misc. Application No. 1473 of 2021, which was filed by respondent No. 1 herein, for condonation of delay in filing of the application for restoration, and seeking thereby to restore the Special Civil Suit No. 269 of 2002, which came to be dismissed for want of prosecution by the trial court on 3rd November 2011.

3. Vide an order dated 24th April 2023, this Court issued notice to the respondents and stayed the proceedings before the trial court.

4. Shorn of details, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under:

4.1 The present appeal is concerned with certain lands situated at Sonkhar Village, in Taluka and District Thane, Maharashtra (hereinafter referred to as “suit land”). There are competing claims with respect to the ownership of the suit land.

4.2 The Government of Maharashtra, through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Metro Centre, Thane, vide Award Nos. 1 and 2 in the year 1986 and 1988, respectively, acquired the subject land for public purpose, and handed over the said lands for development/execution to City Industrial Development Corporation, Maharashtra (CIDCO).

4.3 In the year 2002, Special Civil Suit No. 269 of 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “subject suit”) was filed by the original plaintiff – Pravin Jamndas Thakkar (Kanani) (since deceased and now represented by his legal heirs respondent Nos. 2 and 3), in the trial court against the Government of Maharashtra (defendant No. 1/respondent No. 4 herein), Special Land Acquisition Officer, Thane (defendant No. 2/respondent No. 5 herein), Vijay Laxman Bhawe (Defendant No.3) (since deceased and now represented through his legal heirs – viz. appellant Nos. 1 and 2 herein), Union of India (defendant No. 4/ respondent No. 6 herein) and City Industrial Development Corporation, Maharashtra (CIDCO) (defendant No. 5/ respondent No. 7 herein) for relief of declaration that the acquisition of suit land is illegal, null and void, and in the alternative, if the court holds that acquisition is good then declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to 12½ % Gaonthan Extension Scheme, in lieu of acquired lands as per the Gaonthan Extension Scheme of CIDCO.

4.4 In the year 2005, the original plaintiff – Pravin Jamndas Thakkar (Kanani) passed away.

4.5 The legal heirs of the original plaintiff, through their Power of Attorney holder, one Mr. Arunkumar Jayantilal Mucchalla, filed an application for condonation of delay in applying for bringing legal heirs of the plaintiff on record, and filed another application for bringing the legal heirs of the plaintiff on record in the subject suit.

4.6 Vide order dated 28th November 2006, the trial court allowed the application for condonation of delay as well as the application for bringing the legal heirs of the plaintiff on record in the subject suit. However, vide order dated 3rd November 2011, the trial court dismissed the subject suit for want of prosecution.

4.7 On 7th November 2019, respondents No. 2 and 3, i.e., the legal heirs of the plaintiff, filed an application, viz., Misc. Civil Application (MCA) No. 1082 of 2019 in the subject suit, seeking condonation of delay of 8 years and 4 days in filing an application for restoration of subject suit. This application is still pending adjudication.

4.8 On 12th October 2021, i.e., during the pendency of the aforesaid application filed by the legal heirs of the plaintiff, respondent No. 1, a private limited company, claiming to be the “assignee” from the legal heirs of the plaintiff, filed an application viz., Misc. Civil Application (MCA) No. 1473 of 2021 in the su