IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 46 of 2026 In F/FIRST APPEAL/35199/2025 ==========================================================

LAKSHMIDAS KESHAVBHAI SINCE DECD. THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS &

ORS.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR KUNAL S SHAH(5282) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,2 MS.HIMANI SHAH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER Date : 03/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Ms.Himani Shah waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondents.

2. These applications are filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 3189 days occurred in filing the captioned first appeals claiming the enhancement of the compensation.

3. Heard learned advocate Mr.Kunal Shah for the applicant and learned AGP Ms.Himani Shah for the State.

4. Learned advocate Mr.Shah submits that though the judgment and award was passed on 14.08.2018, the compensation was received during the years 2020–2021. In absence of sufficient funds, the claimant could not approach this Court in time. It is further submitted by the learned advocate Mr. Shah that in respect of the adjoining village Sherdi, the amount of compensation has been enhanced by this Court and upon gaining knowledge of the said fact, the claimant approached the concerned advocate for filing the appeal. It is submitted by the learned advocate Mr. Shah that the claimant would not claim the interest for the delayed period and therefore, the applications seeking condonation of delay be allowed and the first appeals be heard on merits.

5. Per contra, learned AGP Ms.Himani Shah for the State has opposed the applications for condonation of delay and prayed to reject these applications.

6. 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 Officer, 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.

6.1 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 applications require to be allowed and the delay of 3189 days is required to be condoned. In that background, the applications are allowed and the delay of 3189 days occurred in preferring the first appeal is hereby condoned.

7. 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