IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 595 of

2026 In F/FIRST APPEAL/2918/2026 ==========================================================

LHS OF RAMANBHAI VIRAMBHAI PATEL & ORS.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR MANISH S SHAH(5859) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3,2 MR. BHAVESH DESAI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER Date : 10/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Mr. Bhavesh Desai waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of State.

2. The present application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 656 days in preferring the appeal challenging the judgment and award passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bayad, District Aravalli, in Land Reference Case No. 17 of 2020, dated 12.01.2024. It is submitted by learned advocate Mr. Manish Shah that although the judgment and award were passed on 12.01.2024, the compensation as directed by the learned Reference Court was paid on 20.08.2025. It is further submitted that the applicant, being an agriculturist, was facing financial constraints and, in the absence of requisite court fees, was unable to prefer the appeal within the prescribed period. Upon receipt of the compensation amount, the present appeal has been filed along with the present application for condonation of delay. It is further submitted by learned advocate Mr. Manish Shah that in respect of the same village, similarly situated claimants have preferred appeals along with applications for condonation of delay, which came to be allowed by this Court vide order dated 17.11.2021. Learned advocate Mr. Manish Shah further submits that the applicant undertakes not to claim interest for the period of delay. It is contended that considering the background of compulsory acquisition of land and the fact that the claimant has not been awarded reasonable market value, the delay deserves to be condoned in the interest of justice.

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

4. This Court has referred to the decision rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Suresh Kumar V/s. State of Haryana and Others reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 896, wherein the 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 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 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 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.

5. It is observed by the Apex Court that the appellants who approached the Court with delay, would not be granted interest for such period. Considering the explanation offered in the application, particularly the facts narrated in paragraph 3 regarding the death of the original Claimant No. 1/2 during the pendency of the reference and the subsequent filing of the application before the learned Reference Court for amendment, this Court deems it fit to allow the application, condoning the delay of 656 da