Bombay High Court
HIRAMAN MACCHU RATHOD DIED THR LRS SUNDABAI HIRAMAN RATHOD AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The Court condoned the 2013‑day delay in filing the first appeal, allowing the application to proceed.
Summary
The heirs of the deceased Hiraman Macchu Rathod filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 2013‑day delay in filing a first appeal against a 2017 judgment that awarded them a meager compensation for land acquired compulsorily. They argued that their livelihood was destroyed and that they were unable to approach counsel earlier due to poverty and lack of legal knowledge. The State opposed the condonation, alleging the appeal was filed merely to obtain additional money. The Court held that claimants have a statutory right to seek enhancement of compensation and that delay should not be a bar to that right. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Suresh Kumar v. State of Haryana (2025), the Court condoned the delay, allowed the application, but denied any statutory interest for the delayed period and ordered registration of the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 2013 days in filing a first appeal against a land acquisition compensation award can be condoned.
- Whether the statutory right to claim enhancement of compensation overrides the limitation period.
- Whether technical delay should bar the claimant from seeking a higher compensation.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation enhancement
- condonation of delay
- limitation period
- statutory right
- civil appeal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:37616
(1) 918 CA 11228 OF 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
918 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11228 OF 2023
IN FAST/19503/2023
HIRAMAN MACCHU RATHOD DIED THR LRS SUNDABAI HIRAMAN RATHOD
AND ORS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
...
Mr. S. M. Kakade, Advocate for Applicants
Mr. A. V. Lavte, AGP for Respondents-State
…
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATE : 19.08.2026
PER COURT :-
. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 22.09.2017
passed by the learned Reference Court in Land Acquisition Reference Case
No.813 of 2011 the applicants/claimants are before this Court in the first
appeal. The present civil application is for condonation of delay of 2013 days
in filing the first appeal.
2. The applicants submit that their source of earning and livelihood
has been taken away due to compulsory acquisition of his property. That, very
meager amount was awarded to the applicants by the Competent Authority.
That even, the learned Reference Court has also not granted adequate
enhancement to the applicants. Hence, present First Appeal is filed by the
(2) 918 CA 11228 OF 2023
applicants. However, due to lack of legal knowledge, general awareness of the
proceedings and poor financial conditions despite a wish to get enhanced
compensation, they could not approach for legal advise, nor could they file the
present appeal well within limitation or at the earliest thereafter. With this, the
applicants seek condonation of delay caused in filing present appeal.
3. Per contra, the respondents oppose condonation of the delay,
contending that the application and appeal are filed afterthought and they are
filed with sole object to earn more money on sympathy.
4. Upon having heard the parties, I am of the considered view that
enhancement by way of First Appeal is a statutory right of claimant. The
farmers, whose agricultural land has been acquired, must get adequate
opportunity to claim for adequate and proportionate enhancement in the
compensation. For that, technicality of delay must not be a hurdle.
5. Profitable reference can be made to the judgment and order
passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Suresh Kumar Vs. State of
Haryana and ors., (Civil Appeal arising out of (C) No.670/2020) and
connected matters decided on 23.04.2025. Their Lordships, after considering
series of judgments, have observed in paragraph 11, as follows :-
(3) 918 CA 11228 OF 2023
“11. In all judgments referred supra, the common thread that can
be observed is that delay is not a reason to deny the land losers
their compensation, which is just, fair and reasonable for the land
they have lost.”
6. Thus, for the reasons stated above, I am inclined to condone the
delay, caused in filing the First Appeal. Hence, following order :
ORDER
a. Delay of 2013 days, caused in filing First Appeal is hereby
condoned.
b. Civil Application stands allowed.
c. Applicants shall not claim any benefit or statutory interest for
the delayed period.
d. Registry to register the appeal, subject to removal of office
objections, if any, by the applicants/appellants within two weeks
from today.
7. On registration of the appeal, issue notice to the respondents,
returnable on 30.09.2026. Learned AGP waives service of notice for all the
respondents.
8. Call for Record and Proceeding.
[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]
PRW
Checking your session…