IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 4579 of

2025 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4225 of 2025 ==========================================================

CHAMPABEN NANJIBHAI SANDHANI & ORS.

Versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR KRUSHNAKANT D PATEL(10632) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3 MR TEJAS P SATTA(3149) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3 RAHUL DAVE AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER Date : 21/11/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Mr. Dave waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No.1.

2. Learned advocate Mr. Satta for the applicants submits that the other claimants of the same group, whose lands are also acquired under the same acquisition, have approached this Court by filing the first appeals, which are admitted by this Court and the same are pending for filing adjudication. Learned advocate Mr. Satta submits that the original claimant was the person who was handling the proceedings before the learned Reference Court and the heirs were unaware about such proceedings and on getting the information with regard to the first appeals which are filed by the identically situated claimant, the present first appeal is filed; however, in filing this appeal, delay of 2320 days has caused. Learned advocate Mr. Satta submits that it is a case of compulsory acquisition, wherein the claimant has lost his land. Learned advocate Mr. Satta further submits that he would not claim interest in the event of succeeding in the first appeal for the delayed period and therefore, he prays that this application may be allowed.

3. Per contra, learned AGP Mr. Dave has opposed the application for condonation of delay.

4. This Court has referred to the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Suresh Kumar V/s. State of Haryana and Others reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 896, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that even though there was long delay in filing the appeals, it was a case of compulsory acquisition and there had been a difference in the amount of compensation granted to some land losers vis-a-vis others. This Court has also referred to the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Market Committee Hodal V/s. Krishan Murari, reported in 1996 (1) SC 311, wherein delay of 3240 days arising from the same acquisition had been condoned. This Court has also referred to the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Huchanagouda V/s. Assistant Commissioner and Land Acquisition O reported in 2020 (19) SCC 236, wherein the Court had taken into account the poverty and illiteracy of the land loser and condoned the delay of more than 2,000 days. While condoning the delay, the Hon’ble Apex Court had observed that equities had to be balanced by ensuring that the determination of market value relates back to the preliminary notification - making sure that there is no prejudice to the acquiring authorities, as also no undue advantage to the land loser.

4.1. It is observed by the Hon’ble Apex Court that the appellants who approached the Court with delay, would not be granted interest for such period. Having considered the explanation offered in the application and the submissions made in the above paragraph No.2, this Court is of the considered view that the application requires to be allowed and the delay is required to be condoned. In that background, the application is allowed.

5. It is needless to clarify that the applicants-original claimants shall not be entitled to the interest in event of the enhancement amount of compensation, if any, for the interregnum period i.e. from the date of pronouncement of the impugned judgment and award till the date of filing of the present appeal.

6. Copy of this order shall be placed in the docket of the first appeal. Rule is made