Page No.# 1/17 GAHC030000882025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/21/2025 The Collector/Special Land Acquisition Officer and 3 Ors. Project Implementation Unit, Public Works Department, Mizoram, Aizawl 2: The Principal Secretary 3: The Under Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram 4: The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizora VERSUS Siamthanga and 32 Ors. R/o Zotlang, Champhai 2:C.Zaithanmawii 3:Lalchhanhima 4:C.Hrangthangmura 5:HT Tlangbiakveli 6:Lalchhuanthanga 7:Nosanga 8:C.Thangzuala Page No.# 2/17 9:Khawsiama 10:K.Rochhunga 11:Rikhumi 12:Ramdinga 13:C.Lalrammawia 14:C.Zirliana 15:Hrangvunga 16:R.Biakliana 17:H.Lalramhluna 18:Zothantluanga 19:C.Thangseia 20:R.Zalawma 21:Zonunsanga 22:Lianthanga 23:C.Lalthanmawia 24:K.Lalnunpuia Page No.# 3/17 25:Thantluanga 26:Lalrinchhana 27:Lalzoliana 28:Saikhuma 29:Lianthanga 30:Rohmingmawia 31:C.Khawlianchhunga 32:Danny Lalluaia 33:C.Khawlianchhung Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms. Caroline K Lungawipuii Advocate for the Respondent : Mr. Lalbiaknunga Hnamte Linked Case : LA.App./2/2025 The Collector/Special Land Acquisition Officer and 3 Ors. Project Implementation Unit Public Works Department Mizoram Aizawl 2: The Principal Secretary Land Revenue and Settlement Department Mizoram Aizawl Page No.# 4/17 3: The Under Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Land Revenue and Settlement Department Mizoram Aizawl 4: The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Public Works Department Aizawl Mizoram VERSUS Sh Siamthanga and 32 Ors. R/o Zotlang Champhai 2:C.Zaithanmawia R/o Zotlang Champhai 3:Lalchhanhima R/o Zotlang Champhai 4:C.Hrangthangmura R/o Zotlang Champhai 5:HT Tlangbiakveli R/o Zotlang Champhai 6:Lalchhuanthanga R/o Ruantlang Mual Veng Champhai 7:Nosanga R/o Ruantlang Champhai 8:C.Thangzuala R/o Ruantlang Champhai 9:Khawsiama R/o Ruantlang Champhai 10:K.Rochhunga Page No.# 5/17 R/o Ruantlang Champhai 11:Rikhumi R/o Zotlang Champhai 12:Ramdinga R/o Zotlang Champhai 13:C.Lalrammawia R/o Mualkawi Champhai 14:C.Zirliana R/o Zotlang Champhai 15:Hrangvunga R/o Mualkawi Champhai 16:R.Biakliana R/o Mualkawi Champhai 17:H.Lalramhluna R/o Mualkawi Champhai 18:Zothantluanga R/o Mualkawi Champhai 19:C.Thangseia R/o Mualkawi Champhai 20:R.Zalawma R/o Ruantlang Champhai 21:Zonunsanga R/o Champhai Vengthlang Champhai 22:Lianthanga Page No.# 6/17 R/o Mualkawi Champhai 23:C.Lalthanmawia R/o Mualkawi Champhai 24:K.Lalnunpuia R/o Mualkawi Champhai 25:Thantluanga R/o Zotlang Champhai 26:Lalrinchhana R/o Zotlang Champhai 27:Lalzoliana R/o Zotlang Champhai 28:Saikhuma R/o Ruantlang Champhai 29:Lianthanga R/o Mualkawi Champhai 30:Rohmingmawia Champhai 31:C.Khawlianchhunga R/o Mualkawi Champhai 32:Danny Lalluaia R/o Electric Veng Champhai 33:C.Khawlianchhunga R/o Mualkawi Champhai Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms. Caroline K Lungawipuii Advocate for the Respondent : Mr. Lalbiaknunga Hnamte for R1-R33 Page No.# 7/17 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER 29.01.2026 Heard Mrs. Caroline K. Lungawipuii, learned Govt. Advocate for the applicants, who submits that by filing this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the applicants seek condonation of 427 days in filing the connected appeal against the Judgment & Order dated 20.09.2023 passed by the Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Champhai District, Champhai in connection with L.A Case No. 2/2015. [2.] Referring to the application and the statements made therein, the learned Govt. Advocate submits that the fact of the learned L.A Judge having passed the Judgment & Order dated 20.09.2023 came to the knowledge of the applicants only on 06.06.2024 after a letter was sent by the counsel for the respondents to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, who in turn wrote to the Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, Aizawl on 06.06.2024. By that time, eight (8) months and sixteen (16) days time had already lapsed. Several attempts were Page No.# 8/17 made to obtain a certified copy of the Judgment & Order from the Government Advocate concerned at Champhai verbally but however, there was no reply. A letter for filing an appeal against the Judgment & Order was sent to the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram, PWD on 07.08.2024 by the Engineer-in-Chief, PWD. The Under Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram, PWD vide letter dated 23.08.2024 wrote to the Advocate General for taking steps to file an appeal against the Judgment & Order. Although the said letter was received but upon examination of the matter, it was found that a certified copy of the Judgment & Order, copy of the plaint submitted by the parties concerned, written statements and depositions of witnesses were not attached with the said communication. Accordingly, the Project Director, PIU, PWD sent a letter to the Govt. Advocate concerned at Champhai on 02.09.2024 requesting him to send all the related documents in connection with the case so as to enable the Government Counsel concerned to file an appeal before the High Court. However, as no reply was forthcoming, a reminder was sent on 22.10.2024 to the Govt. Advocate at Champhai. [3.] While such was the position, the applicants received a copy of the order dated 25.10.2024 passed by the Court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Champhai in Execution Case Nos. 8 – 10/2024 arising out of L.A Case Nos. 1, 2 Page No.# 9/17 & 3/2015. As per the order dated 25.10.2024, in the Execution Case, notice was issued to the present applicants to show cause as to why the prayer made in the Execution Application should not be granted while fixing 14.11.2024 for filing a shows cause reply. The applicants having not received any communication from their Government Advocate at Champhai, requested the Law & Judicial Department vide letter dated 06.11.2024 to look into the matter. The Under Secretary, Law & Judicial Department vide letter dated 30.10.2024 instructed the Govt. Advocate, Champhai to take necessary action and to provide all the necessary documents to the Office of the Project Director, PIU, PWD, Aizawl. The Project Director also sent a communication to the Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Champhai seeking adjournment of the Execution Case in view of the steps taken for filing an appeal before the High Court. Consequently, on 05.11.2024, a certified copy of the Judgment & Order was issued and furnished to the counsel to prepare the appeal and the said counsel started drafting the application for condonation of delay, which took about two (2) weeks time. However, since the grounds for seeking condonation of delay were not sufficient, additional grounds with supporting documents were sought for and thereafter, the counsel took three (3) weeks to finalize the application for condonation of delay and the appeal was ultimately filed on 30.01.2025. Page No.# 10/17 [4.] The learned Govt. Advocate submits that by the time an appeal could be filed along with condonation of delay application, there was already a delay of 406 days and therefore, the instant application had been filed seeking its condonation. She submits that the delay is due to bonafide reasons and on account of belated receipt of the Judgment & Order of the L.A Judge by the applicants. She also submits that the applicants have a good case on merits and therefore, the delay may be condoned otherwise, the applicants will suffer irreparable loss and hardship. In support of her submission, she relies upon the following authorities:- (1) State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. Vs. Virendra Bahadur Katheria & Ors. reported in (2024) 15 SCC 1. (2) Improvement Trust, Ludhiana Vs. Ujagar Singh & Ors., reported in (2010) 6 SCC 786. [5.] Mr. Lalbiaknunga, learned counsel appearing for the respondents on the other hand submits that the applicants were very much aware about the pendency of the land acquisition case, in view of the fact that they had not only file a written objection but had cross-examined the witnesses produced by the respondents. He also submits that on the date of pronouncement of the Judgment & Order, the Govt. Advocate representing the applicants was also present. Further, a copy of the Judgment & Order was also furnished to the Page No.# 11/17 applicants through their appointed counsel and while the respondents were waiting for them to comply with the Judgment & Order, since no developments was forthcoming, the counsel for the respondents sent a letter to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, PWD forwarding a copy of the Judgment & Order dated 20.09.2023. Even then, despite the receipt of the same, since no immediate steps were taken, the respondents had no other option but to file the Execution Case seeking execution of the Judgment & Order of the L.A Judge. He submits that no diligent effort was put in by the applicants to obtain a certified copy of the Judgment & Order and they only resorted to writing letter after letter to the Govt. Advocate at Champhai, who did not bother to respond. He submits that even on the part of the applicants themselves, they have failed to show diligence by taking prompt steps despite receipt of the requisite materials for preparing an appeal. In this connection, he draws the attention of this Court to the Communication dated 07.08.2024 (Annexure – 11 of the application) written by the Engineer-in-Chief, PWD to the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram, PWD. [6.] The learned counsel for the respondents submits that enclosed with the aforesaid letter were the grounds for preferring an appeal along with other enclosures, including the impugned Judgment & Order dated 20.09.2023 sought Page No.# 12/17 to be challenged. Therefore, he submits that it is clear that as on 07.08.2024, the applicants clearly had the requisite materials to take prompt steps for filing an appeal but instead the appeal has only been filed on 30.01.2025, which goes to show that the applicants have been grossly negligent to pursue the matter at every stage. Such being the position, the learned counsel submits that the application seeking condonation of delay should be rejected and dismissed. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel relies upon the following authorities:- (1) Order dated 01.07.2025 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in I.A(Civil) No. 169/2024 (Sh. C. Lalhmachhuana Vs. State of Mizoram & Ors.) (2) W. Rabi Singh Vs. State of Manipur & Ors., reported in (2012) 3 GLR 482. (3) Office of the Chief Post Master General & Ors. Vs. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. reported in (2012) 3 SCC 563 and (4) Pundlik Jalam Patil (D) by Lrs. Vs. Exe. Eng. Jalgaon Medium Project & Anr. reported in (2008) 17 SCC 448. [7.] I have considered the submissions made by the rival parties and I have perused the materials available on record. According to the applicants, there is a delay of 427 days in filing the connected appeal whereas, according to the Page No.# 13/17 computation made by the Registry, the delay is 426 days as can be seen from the Office note dated 18.02.2025. [8.] The applicants are aggrieved with the Judgment & Order dated 20.09.2025 passed by the Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Champhai in L.A Case No. 2/2015. According to them, the same came to their knowledge only on 06.06.2024 when the Superintendent Engineer (PIU), PWD had forwarded the letter of the counsel for the respondents to the Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, Aizawl on 06.06.2024. Thereafter, the Engineer-in-Chief wrote to the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram, PWD on 07.08.2024 stating that the Project Implementation Unit, PWD is aggrieved by the Judgment & Order and as such, an appeal should be preferred against the said Judgment & Order. What transpired between 06.06.2024 and 07.08.2024 has not been explained by the applicants despite the fact that there a gap of two (2) months between the two (2) dates. The Under Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram, PWD then wrote a letter to the Advocate General on 23.08.2024 requesting the Advocate General to take necessary action for preferring an appeal against the Judgment & Order passed by the L.A Judge. Upon receipt of the said letter, the explanation tendered is that the documents forwarded were not complete and therefore, several communications were made to the Govt. Advocate at Page No.# 14/17 Champhai to furnish such documents, including the certified copy of the Judgment & Order vide letters dated 02.09.2024, 22.10.2024 and 30.10.2024 amongst others. [9.] Consequently, upon receipt of the certified copy of the Judgment & Order on 05.11.2024, the counsel for the applicants started drafting the appeal as well as the application for condonation of delay. But then, additional grounds were sought since the materials which were already furnished were found to be not sufficient. Thereafter, further three (3) weeks time was spent for finalization of the condonation application as well as the appeal and ultimately, the appeal filed along with application for condonation of delay on 30.01.2025. [10.] A perusal of the entire sequence of events goes to show that the applicants have not been vigilant in taking necessary steps without delay. It is no doubt true that their counsel at Champhai may not have informed them about the passing of the impugned Judgment & Order but at the same time it is also the duty of the applicants to be vigilant by seeking information about the status of their case from time to time. The fact of the applicants having filed their written objection to the case filed by the respondents goes to show that they are aware about the pendency of the case. Even the Govt. Advocate representing them is said to have cross-examined the witnesses produced by Page No.# 15/17 the respondents before the learned L.A Judge. Therefore, solely relying upon the information to be received from the Govt. Advocate about the case demonstrates that the applicants have not been diligent. While such is the position, it is also noticed that even the respondents on their part, after the passing of the Judgment & Order dated 20.09.2023 had not bothered to furnish a copy of the Judgment & Order to the applicants for compliance. This can be noticed from the letter written by their counsel to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, PWD on 24.05.2024, which speaks for itself. [11.] According to the submission by the learned counsel for the respondents, the said letter was written before filing of the Execution Case as the same was being contemplated due to inaction by the authorities concerned. The Judgment & Order of the Trial Court is 20.09.2023 and the letter written by the counsel to the applicants is 24.05.2024 and therefore, it is seen that a great deal of time had passed since the passing of the Judgment & Order itself. Both the parties have cited authorities as regards the consideration to be made while dealing with delay condonation. It is an established principle of law that the number of days delay ordinarily would not matter so long as the explanation tendered for the delay is satisfactory, bonafide and acceptable. [12.] In the present case, as already observed, the applicants have not been Page No.# 16/17 vigilant in pursuing the matter and even after information was given by the counsel for the respondents about the disposal of the L.A Case, prompt action had not been taken. The Apex Court in Sheo Raj Singh (supra) had considered various decisions with regard to condonation of delay and thereafter, opined that the hidden forces that are at work in preventing an appeal by the State being presented within the prescribed period of limitation so as not to allow a higher court to pronounce upon the legality and validity of an order of a lower court and thereby secure unholy gains, cannot be ignored. Impediments in the working of the grand scheme of governmental functions have to be removed by taking a pragmatic view on balancing of the competing interests. By making such an observation, the delay condoned by the High Court in the said case was upheld. In the present case, the applicants have sought to impress upon the Court that interest of public would be defeated and that they would suffer irreparable loss, if delay is not condoned and the delay is attributable to default on the part of their counsel. [13.] Thus, upon due consideration of the case in its entirety, this Court finds that despite the applicants having not being able to show that they have pursued their case diligently, I am of the considered view that ends of justice would be served if the delay is condoned, subject to the applicants depositing a Page No.# 17/17 sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only as cost before the Registry of this Court within fifteen (15) days from today. It is ordered accordingly. The amount so deposited shall be credited to the account of the High Court Legal Services Committee, Gauhati High Court, Aizawl Bench and utilized for the purpose of rendering legal services to those in need. [14.] The application accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant