SOMA GENDU INGALE v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS
Case Details
1 989-CA-10330-2021 & Ors. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 989 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10330 OF 2021 IN FAST/23154/2021 SOMA GENDU INGALE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS ... Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr S.G. Sangle Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Ms M.S. Jagtap AND 990 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10331 OF 2021 IN FAST/23129/2021 YASHWANT M. BHALERAO (DIED) DURGABAI (DIED) THR LRS RAVINDRA AND ORS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr P.M. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr V.V. Tarde AND 991 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10333 OF 2021 IN FAST/23161/2021 DILIP DEVARAM AVASARMAL AND ORS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr S.G. Sangle Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Ms M.S. Jagtap AND 992 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10334 OF 2021 IN FAST/23158/2021 2 989-CA-10330-2021 & Ors. RAVINDRA RAJARAM AVASARMAL VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr P.M. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr Chetan Jadhav AND 993 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10335 OF 2021 IN FAST/23148/2021 PRABHAKAR DEORAM AVASARMAL (DIED) THR LRS ANUSAYABAI VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr S.G. Sangle Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Ms M.S. Jagtap AND 994 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10336 OF 2021 IN FAST/23137/2021 TUKARAM DEORAM AVASARMAL (DIED) THR LRS SINDHUBAI VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr P.M. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Ms M.S. Jagtap AND 995 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10337 OF 2021 IN FAST/23165/2021 SUMANBAI HARI AVASARMAL (DIED) THR LRS DILIP AND ORS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 3 989-CA-10330-2021 & Ors. THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr S.G. Sangle Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr V.V. Tarde AND 996 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10338 OF 2021 IN FAST/22958/2021 CHANDRABAI LAHANU HIVARE (DIED) THR LRS WAMAN AND ANR VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr P.M. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr P.R. Nangare AND 997 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10339 OF 2021 IN FAST/23139/2021 SUNIL YADAV AVSARMAL VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr S.G. Sangle Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr P.S. Chavan AND 998 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10340 OF 2021 IN FAST/23170/2021 CHANDRAKANT EKNATH AVASARMAL VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr P.M. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr Chetan Jadhav 4 989-CA-10330-2021 & Ors. AND 999 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10343 OF 2021 IN FAST/23144/2021
Legal Reasoning
Having considered the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dhiraj Singh (D) Tr. Vs. Haryana State (supra), it is necessary to allow these applications for condonation of delay with direction to the respective applicants/claimants to furnish usual undertaking regarding waiving of statutory benefits and interest in respect of delayed period.
Arguments
SHRIRAM DEORAM AVASARMAL VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr S.G. Sangle Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr P.R. Nangare AND 1000 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10345 OF 2021 IN FAST/22945/2021 VISHWANATH DEORAM AVASARMA (DIED) THR LRS NABABI AND ORS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA TR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr P.M. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr Chetan Jadhav AND 1001 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10346 OF 2021 IN FAST/22947/2021 KISHOR EKNATH AVASARMAL (DEAD) THR LRS MANGALABAI AND ORS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA TR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr S.G. Sangle Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr Chetan Jadhav AND 1002 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10347 OF 2021 IN FAST/23132/2021 PUNA KHUSHAL AVASARMAL (DIED) THR LRS SAHEBRAO AND ANR 5 989-CA-10330-2021 & Ors. VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr P.M. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr Chetan Jadhav AND 1003 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10348 OF 2021 IN FAST/23127/2021 BHASKAR SHANKAR AVASARMAL ND ORS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr S.G. Sangle Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr V.V. Tarde AND 1004 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10351 OF 2021 IN FAST/23142/2021 SHARAD EKNATH AVASARMAL VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr P.M. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr P.R. Nangare AND 1005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10353 OF 2021 IN FAST/22908/2021 ISHWAR PANDIT AVASARMAL AN ORS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr S.G. Sangle Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr P.S. Chavan 6 989-CA-10330-2021 & Ors. AND 1006 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10354 OF 2021 IN FAST/22950/2021 YAMUNABAI YADAV AVASARMAL (DIED) THR LRS MADHAV (DIED) THR LRS PANCHSHILA @ RAMABAI AND ORS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR DISTRICT COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS Advocate for Applicant : Mr J.V. Patil AGP for Respondent No. 2 : Mr P.M. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr V.V. Tarde CORAM : SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J. DATE : 16th March, 2022 PER COURT : 1. These are the applications for condonation of delay moved by the respective applicants/claimants. 2. Heard Mr J.V. Patil, learned counsel for the applicants/claimants, the learned AGPs for the respondent in respective applications and Ms Manjusha Jagtap, Mr V.V. Tarde, Mr Chetan Jadhav, Mr P.R. Nangare and Mr P.S. Chavan, learned counsel for respondents in respective applications. 3. Mr Patil, learned counsel for the applicants/claimants submitted that these are the cases of compulsory land acquisition. The lands of the poor farmers came to be acquired by way of compulsory acquisition. They could not arrange for the funds. As such, could not prefer the appeal which resulted into delay. The delay was not intentional. He therefore, urged to condone the delay. He has also pointed out that in connected matters, this Court (Coram : Vinay Joshi, J.) dated 24.01.2022 was pleased to condone the delay of 1961 days. He 7 989-CA-10330-2021 & Ors. seeks leave to place on record a copy of order passed in civil application No. 10344/2021. Leave granted. 4. Copy of order dated 24.01.2022 is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the acquiring body strongly opposed to condone the delay. They submitted that the delay caused by the respective applicants/claimants is of a large volume. They have not assigned cogent reasons for condonation of delay. There is no merit in the applications for condonation of delay. Their applications for condonation of delay may be dismissed. 6. The learned AGPs in respective applications also argued on the same lines. 7. In the above said group of applications for condonation of delay, it appears that the delay ranges between 1005 to 2155 days. It is undisputed position that the lands of the applicants/claimants came to be acquired by way of compulsory acquisition. 8. The co-ordinate bench of this Court (Coram : Vinay Joshi, J.) vide order dated 24.01.2022 was pleased to condone the delay of 1961 days while allowing civil application No. 10344/2021 arising out of same project. Moreover, in case of Dhiraj Singh (D) Tr. Vs. Haryana State reported in MANU/SC/0778/2014, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down the guidelines in respect of dealing with the applications for condonation of delay arising out of land acquisition matters. It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that while dealing with the application for condonation of delay arising out of land 8 989-CA-10330-2021 & Ors. acquisition matters, a different approach needs to be taken. These persons should not be deprived of reasonable compensation for their lands. The Court needs to take a liberal view while considering the application for condonation of delay. The right of appeal cannot be thrown away at the threshold simply on the ground of technicality. The equities can be balanced by denying land owners about interest for the period for which they did not approach the Court. 9.
Decision
ORDER (i) The applications are hereby allowed in terms of prayer clause (B) on condition that the applicants/claimants shall furnish their undertaking with the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court stating that they shall not claim statutory benefits and interest in respect of the delayed period. (ii) After furnishing such undertaking by the applicants/claimants, the Registry to make scrutiny of these appeals as per procedure and thereafter, those be numbered and placed before the Court for admission. (iii) The civil applications are accordingly disposed of. mta ( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.)