TIKARAM S/O TULSHIRAM RATHOD THR. P.O.A. SHRIRAM T. RATHOD v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR, YAVATMAL AND OTHERS
CAF/13/2020 · 2025-01-10
Shri Sandipkumar Chandrabhan More
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 50648 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 50648 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
4 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CAF NO.13 OF 2020 IN FIRST APPEAL ST NO.11547 OF 2019D TIKARAM S/O TULSHIRAM RATHOD THR. P.O.A. SHRIRAM T. RATHOD VS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR, YAVATMAL AND OTHERS ______________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders. Mr. D.G. Patil, Advocate for the appellant/s Mr. A.M. Kukday, Advocate for the respondent No.3 Mr. M.A. Kadu, AGP for the respondent/State ------------------------------- CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. DATE : 10 th January, 2025
1.
Heard rival submissions.
2.
The applicant-claimant is seeking condonation of delay of 642 days in filing appeal against the judgment and award dated 13.04.2017 passed by the learned Reference Court in Land Acquisition Case (LAC) No.52 of
2010.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent No.3/ acquiring body and the ld AGP strongly opposed the application on the ground of inordinate delay. However, considering the statutory rights of the applicant, the delay of 642 days stands condoned, subject to cost of Rs.1000/- to be deposited with the Registry of this Court for utilization of dispensary of this Court, within two weeks.
4. The appeal be registered after deposit of cost nd.thawre 2025:BHC-NAG:290
4 2 and removal of all the objections, if any.
5. It is made clear that the applicant/claimant shall not claim any interest and statutory benefits for the aforesaid period of delay.
6. The application is accordingly disposed of.
(SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.) nd.thawre