Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

ASHOK S/O RAGHUNATH WADIKAR DECEASED THROUGH LRS SHARAD AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE DIST COLLECTOR LATUR AND ORS.

Disposal
Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

Holding

The Court held that a delay of 606 days may be condoned where the claimants have satisfactorily explained the delay and are seeking a statutory entitlement, while the question of entitlement to statutory benefits and interest is to be decided at the final hearing.

Summary

The claimants filed applications seeking condonation of a 606‑day delay in filing their first appeals, asserting a statutory right to enhanced compensation. The State and another respondent opposed condonation, arguing that the claimants would not be entitled to statutory benefits and interest for the delayed period and that the issue should be decided at the final hearing. The Court examined the applicants' explanation for the delay and, noting that they were pursuing a statutory entitlement, decided to condone the delay. It ordered that the question of entitlement to statutory benefits and interest be left open for determination during the hearing of the appeals. Consequently, the applications were allowed, the appeals were to be admitted after removal of any objections, and the civil applications were disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether a delay of 606 days in filing the appeals can be condoned
  • Whether the claimants are entitled to statutory benefits and interest for the delayed period

Subjects

  • condonation of delay
  • statutory compensation
  • interest entitlement
  • civil procedure
  • first appeal

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:38250
                                               1                        956 CA 13499-2025.odt


                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          956 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13499 OF 2025
                           IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 32668 OF 2025
                                            WITH
                  CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13497 OF 2025 IN FAST/32670/2025
                                            WITH
                  CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13501 OF 2025 IN FAST/32672/2025
                                            WITH
                  CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13505 OF 2025 IN FAST/32786/2025
                                            WITH
                  CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13502 OF 2025 IN FAST/32782/2025
                                            WITH
                  CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13503 OF 2025 IN FAST/32777/2025
                                            WITH
                  CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13500 OF 2025 IN FAST/32674/2025

                        KHANDERAO S/O SHIVAJI WADIKAR AND OTHERS
                                              VERSUS
              THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR LATUR
                                           AND OTHERS
                                                 …
             Mr. K.R. Choudhari h/f. Mr. S.B. Solanke – Advocate for Applicants
             Ms. V.S. Chaudhari – AGP for Respondent No.1/State
             Mr. R.A. Tambe – Advocate for Respondent No.3
                                                 …

                                   CORAM           : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
                                   DATE            : 21.08.2026

             PER COURT :
             1.      These applications have been filed by the claimants for

             condonation of delay of 606 days in filing the appeals in the group of

             First Appeals listed today, involving similar matters arising out of the

             same group.

             2.      Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the delay has been

             satisfactorily explained in the applications. It is submitted that the
                                     2                         956 CA 13499-2025.odt


claimants are seeking enhancement of compensation as a statutory right.

3.       At this juncture, learned Counsel for the contesting respondent

No.3 as well as learned A.G.P. for respondent No.1/State oppose the

applications for condonation of delay on the ground that the claimants

would not be entitled to statutory benefits and interest thereon for the

delayed period. It is submitted that the issue of entitlement to such

statutory benefits and interest be kept open for consideration at the time

of final hearing of the appeals.

4.       Considering the explanation given by the applicants and the fact

that the claimants are seeking their statutory entitlement, the delay of

606 days deserves to be condoned. The issue regarding entitlement to

statutory benefits and interest for the delayed period is kept open for

consideration at the time of hearing of the appeals. Hence, the delay of

606 days in filing the appeals stands condoned.

5.       The applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’.

6.       The appeals be placed for admission after removal of office

objections, if any.

7.       The Civil Applications are accordingly disposed of.

8.       In view of the aforementioned applications, a copy of this order

shall be maintained along with the respective First Appeals.




                                             [ MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. ]
Pooja Kale/


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.