Bombay High Court
The Exec Engr Irrigation Department Strengthening Division Omerga Taluka Omerga Dist OsmanabadversusLaxman Sopan Lohar And Other
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The delay of 2,725 days was condoned as it was not intentional or deliberate, and the application for condonation of delay was allowed.
Summary
The Executive Engineer of the Irrigation Department (the acquiring body) filed an appeal 2,725 days after the original order, prompting a civil application for condonation of delay. The claimant (respondent No.1) and the Attorney General of the State opposed the condonation. The court examined the acquiring body's explanation, finding it satisfactory and concluding that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate. Accordingly, the court granted condonation of the delay and allowed the application. The court also directed the registry to list a pending application for withdrawal of amount on 24 September 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 2,725 days in filing an appeal can be condoned under the Civil Procedure Code.
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- civil procedure
- appeal
- acquisition
- irrigation department
- high court
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:42550
1 946-CA-12699-2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
946 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12699 OF 2025
IN FAST/34193/2025
The Exec. Engr. Irrigation Department Strengthening Division Omerga
Taluka Omerga Dist Osmanabad
VERSUS
Laxman Sopan Lohar And Other
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12700 OF 2025
IN FAST/34193/2025
The Exec Engr Irrigation Department Strengthening Division Omerga
Taluka Omerga Dist Osmanabad
VERSUS
Laxman Sopan Lohar And Others
...
Mr.Madhav N. Kalyane h/f Mr. Gulab Balbhim Rajale, for the Applicants.
Ms.Vaishali Chaudhari, AGP for the Respondent/State.
….
CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
DATE : 10.09.2026
PER COURT :
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12699 OF 2025
1. There is a delay of 2725 days in filing the Appeal by the
Acquiring Body. After issuing notice, an appearance is caused on behalf of
Respondent No.1, who is the claimant. The learned AGP appears for
Respondent Nos.2 and 3. The application for condonation of delay is
opposed by the learned AGP as well as the claimant. The reasons for
delay in filing the Appeal are mentioned in Paragraph Nos.4 and 5 in the
application.
Sunny Thote
2 946-CA-12699-2025.odt
2. In view of the explanation given by the Acquiring Body,
which is found to be satisfactory. Delay being neither intentional nor
deliberate, the same deserves to be condoned.
3. This Civil Application for condonation of delay is allowed in
terms of Prayer Clause [B].
4. It is submitted that although the claimant has filed the
application for withdrawal of amount is not listed today. Hence, the
Registry of this Court shall take necessary steps and and list the same on
24th September, 2026.
[ MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. ]
Sunny Thote
Checking your session…