JUDGMENT :

Abdullah Gulamahmed Uraizee, J.

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Urmila Desai, learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent-State.

2. Heard Mr. A.V. Prajapati, learned advocate for the applicants and Ms. Urmila Desai, learned AGP for the respondent.

3. The present application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has preferred to condone the delay of 2124 days which has occurred in preferring First Appeal to assail the impugned judgment and award of the Trial Court.

4. Mr. A.V. Prajapati, learned advocate for the applicants submit that the applicants are farmers having no knowledge about the legal remedy and hence, they could not prefer the appeal within prescribed period. It is his further submission that the applicants had not abandoned their right to prefer an appeal and no malafide is apparent so as to dismiss the present application.

5. He relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in case of K. Subbarayudu v. Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) reported in 2017 (12) SCC 840. He submits that the term "sufficient cause" should receive liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice. He further submits that the applicants are ready and