The Deputy Chief Engineer, Central Railway Division, Ajani, Nagpur v. Shri Jagdamba Devi and Shri Shankarji Devashtan, Yavatmal
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 07 Jan 2025
- Bench
- PRAVIN S PATIL, NITIN B SURYAWANSHI
Provisions considered
- Limitation Act, 1963 s. 5
Judgment
The Deputy Chief Engineer, Central Railway Division, Ajani, Nagpur Versus Shri Jagdamba Devi and Shri Shankarji Devashtan, Yavatmal through Kulbhushan Glkulprasad Tiwari and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Court's or Judge's Order Shri Nitin Lambat, Advocate for the appellant. Shri M.M.Agnihotri, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 to 15. Ms. Mayuri Deshmukh, AGP for the respondent/State. CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI & PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ. DATED : 25th FEBRUARY, 2025. This appeal is filed by acquiring body under Section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, challenging the judgment delivered by Land Acquisition Tribunal in Case No.1377/AMT/YTL/2019. Along with appeal, application for condonation of delay of 495 days is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. ii. This Court at Principal Seat in Municipal Corporation of Grater Mumbai vs Anusaya Sitaram Devrukhkar and others (Interim SKNair 2 48-fast-18597-23.odt Application No.13254/2024 in First Appeal (ST) No.24058/2024 in Reference No.827/KOK/MUM(SOB)/2021 with connected matters, decided on 07-01-2025) has taken a view that High Court has no power to condone the delay beyond a total period of 120 days as stipulated in Section 74(1) (read with its proviso) of the Act, 2013. iii. Relying on the above judgment, this Court by order dated 20-01-2025 passed in Civil Application (CAF) No.1927/2024 in First Appeal (ST) No.8383/2024 and First Appeal (ST) No.8383/2024 and by order dated 17-02-2025 in Civil Application (CAF) No. 3123/2023 in First Appeal (ST) No. 18601/2023 has dismissed the application for condonation of delay, filed by the acquiring body under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. iv. For the reasons stated in the judgment in Municipal Corporation of Grater Mumbai (Supra), application for condonation of delay is dismissed. v. Claimants are permitted to withdraw the amount of compensation pending before this Court, along with accrued interest thereon. vi. Learned Counsel for applicant seeks stay to this order. For the reasons stated in the order, the request for stay is rejected [PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.] [NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.] SKNair
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Limitation Act, 1963 — s. 5.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 07 Jan 2025. The bench was PRAVIN S PATIL, NITIN B SURYAWANSHI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.