Bombay High Court
SHESHRAO SAKHARAM PUNEKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
Delay of 2,243 days in filing the first appeals is condoned and the civil applications are allowed.
Summary
The petitioners, owners of agricultural land acquired by the State of Maharashtra, challenged the compensation awarded by the Competent Authority and sought enhancement through first appeals. Their appeals were filed 2,243 days after the judgment, and they requested condonation of delay, citing lack of legal knowledge and financial constraints. The State opposed, alleging the delay was a ploy to obtain additional money. The Court held that enhancement of compensation is a statutory right and that delay should not bar claimants, relying on Supreme Court precedent in Suresh Kumar v. State of Haryana which emphasized that delay cannot defeat just compensation. Accordingly, the Court condoned the delay, allowed the civil applications, and ordered registration of the appeals, while denying any statutory interest for the delayed period. The order also directed the registry to remove any office objections and waived service of notice for the respondents.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay of 2,243 days in filing the first appeals can be condoned
- Whether delay can be a ground to deny enhancement of compensation in land acquisition cases
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation enhancement
- condonation of delay
- statutory right
- civil appeal
- High Court
- Maharashtra
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:37618
(1) 919 Ca 12690 OF 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
919 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12690 OF 2023
IN FAST/26500/2023
UDDHAV BABARAO PUNEKAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12691 OF 2023
IN FAST/26504/2023
SUSHILABAI BANSI DONGRE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12692 OF 2023
IN FAST/26502/2023
SHESHRAO SAKHARAM PUNEKAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
...
Mr. S. M. Kakade, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. B. V. Virdhe AGP for Respondents-State
…
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATE : 19.08.2026
PER COURT :-
. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 29.03.2017
passed by the learned Reference Court in Land Acquisition Reference Case
(2) 919 Ca 12690 OF 2023
Nos.517 of 2012, 528 of 2012 and 518 of 2012 respectively, the
applicants/claimants are before this Court in the first appeals. The present
civil applications are for condonation of delay of 2243 days in filing the first
appeals.
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 Appeals are filed by the
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 appeals well within limitation or at the earliest thereafter. With this,
the applicants seek condonation of delay caused in filing present appeals.
3. Per contra, the respondents oppose condonation of the delay,
contending that the applications and appeals 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 claimants. The
(3) 919 Ca 12690 OF 2023
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 :-
“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 Appeals. Hence, following order :
ORDER
a. Delay of 2243 days, caused in filing First Appeals is hereby
condoned.
b. Civil Applications stand allowed.
c. Applicants shall not claim any benefit or statutory interest for
the delayed period.
(4) 919 Ca 12690 OF 2023
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 appeals, 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…