Bombay High Court
RAM BALI RANKHAMB (DEAD) THR LRS GAYABAI AND ORS.versusTHE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR (EARTHQUAKE), OSMANABAD.
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The Court allowed the application, condoned the delay, and registered the cross‑objection, but denied any interest or statutory benefit for the delayed period.
Summary
The applicants, heirs of the deceased Ram Bali Rankhamb, filed a cross‑objection seeking enhancement of compensation in a land acquisition case, but delayed filing it by 2,845 days. They argued that their statutory right to enhancement could not be lost due to procedural delay. The respondent, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, opposed the late filing. The Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Suresh Kumar v. State of Haryana (2025 INSC 550), considered whether the delay could be condoned in the interest of justice. It held that the application for condonation should be allowed, registering the cross‑objection while denying any interest or statutory benefit for the delayed period. Consequently, the delay was condoned and the cross‑objection was permitted.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 2,845 days in filing a cross‑objection for compensation enhancement can be condoned.
- Whether the statutory right to compensation enhancement is forfeited due to procedural delay.
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- cross‑objection
- land acquisition
- compensation enhancement
- judicial legislation
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:45715
940-CA-10970-26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10970 OF 2026
IN
CROSS OBJECTION (ST) NO. 23614 OF 2026
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2978 OF 2018
Ram Bali Rankhamb
(Died) Through L.Rs.
Gayabai Ram Rankhamb and Others ..APPLICANTS
VERSUS
Special Land Acquisition Officer and
Additional Collector (Earthquake), Osmanabad ..RESPONDENT
....
Mr. S.N. Patil, Advocate for applicant
Mr. A.V. Lavte, A.G.P. for respondent
....
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. This application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 2845 days
caused in filing cross-objection. The first appeal is filed by the acquiring body
in this Court against the judgment and award dated 16 th August, 2013 passed
by the learned C.J.S.D., Osmananbad in Land Acquisition Reference No. 236
of 2005 (Old No. 55 of 1998).
2. Pursuant to the notices issued in the first appeal, the applicant has
marked his appearance. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation,
the applicant has also filed cross-objection for enhancement. There is delay of
1 / 2
940-CA-10970-26.odt
2845 days caused in filing the cross-objection. The reasons for delay are
stated in Paragraph Nos.2 and 3 in a large amount of words. It is stated that
the applicant has statutory right for enhancement, which cannot be deprived
on account of any technicality. Obviously, the appeal is still pending for
hearing.
3. In view of the above and the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of Suresh Kumar Suresh Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and
Ors. (2025 INSC 550), I deem it appropriate to allow the application.
4. In the light of this fact and considering that this is a case of judicial
legislation, the application is allowed. Delay is condoned. Cross-objection be
registered. The applicant shall not be entitled for any interest or any statutory
benefit for the delayed period if cross-objection is allowed.
( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. )
SSD
2 / 2
Checking your session…