1 50 to 52 ca 8170.24 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 50 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8170 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 11682 OF 2024 Bhagwan Sahebrav Vidhate and another .. Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Collector Office, Jalna and others .. Respondents Shri S. M. kakde, Advocate for the Applicants. Mrs. M. N. Ghanekar, A.G.P. for the Respondent No. 1. AND 51 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8763 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 11662 OF 2024 Sudhakar Baburao Vidhate Since deceased through his L.Rs. Latabai Sudhakar Vidhate and others .. Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Collector Office, Jalna and others .. Respondents Shri S. M. kakde, Advocate for the Applicants. Shri S. V. Hange, A.G.P. for the Respondent No. 1. AND 52 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8772 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 11696 OF 2024 Sadashiv Subhashrav Vidhate and another .. Applicants Versus 2025:BHC-AUG:30596 2 50 to 52 ca 8170.24 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Collector Office, Jalna and others .. Respondents Shri S. M. kakde, Advocate for the Applicants. Shri N. R. Dayma, A.G.P. for the Respondent No. 1. CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. DATE : 07TH NOVEMBER, 2025. FINAL ORDER : . Heard both sides. 2. Applicants seek to condone the delay of 2127 caused in filing appeal by Bhagwan Sahebrav Vdhate and another, 2046 days caused in filing appeal by legal heirs of Sudhakar Baburao Vidhate and 2084 days caused in filing appeal by Sadashiv Subhashrav Vidhate and another. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants refers to the contents of the applications. He would submit that the delay has been adequately explained. The applicants are ready to give up interest and statutory benefits for the delayed period. He prays for condonation of delay. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleaders in respective applications repel the submissions on the basis of affidavit in reply. It is submitted that a weak financial condition cannot be a ground to condone the delay. The delay has not been sufficiently explained by the applicants. 3 50 to 52 ca 8170.24 5. The respondent No. 3 – Acquiring Body has not caused appearance, despite service of notice. It did not contest the applications for condonation of delay. 6. I have gone through the averments of the applications. The lands which are acquired were the source of income for the applicants. There is reason to believe that unless some financial assistant is extended, it was not possible for the applicants to prefer the appeals. I do not find malafides on the part of the applicants in preferring the appeals belatedly. The pragmatic approach is to condone the delay by imposing certain conditions. 7. The civil applications are allowed. The delay stands condoned on condition that the applicants shall not be entitled to interest and statutory benefits for the period of delay referred above. Additionally, they are also not entitled to the benefits for the lapses in not circulating the applications that is from 18.04.2024 to 21.02.2025. The civil applications are disposed of. Office shall register the first appeals. [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME J. ] bsb/Nov. 25