IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY Digitally signed by KANCHAN KANCHANVINOD VINOD MAYEKAR MAYEKAR D 20 a 2 te 6 : .02.03

11:42:22 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION +0530 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 326/2018 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 25035/2017 THE IRRIGATION OFFICER ….. APPLICANT VS RAMA NATHU RAHADE(DIED)SHRI.VISHNU RAMBHAU RAHADE AND ORS. …. RESPONDENTS Adv. Mahesh Pawar a/w. Adv. Vikas More for the Applicant.

Mr. A. R. Patil, Additional G.P. for the State/Respondents.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 30 JANUARY, 2026 P.C. :-

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 326/2018

1) This civil application is filed by the acquiring body seeking condonation of delay of 4 years and 186 days in filing First Appeal.

2) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Government Pleader and I have gone through the contents of the application.

3) Supreme Court in the judgment of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and another Vs. Mst. Katji and Others reported in 1987 SC 1353, has held that:

“Every day’s delay must be explained” does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every house’s delay. Every second’s delay ? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner.”

4) Su