Bombay High Court
DATTU VITHALRAO SHINDE AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAH, THR. COLLECTOR, LATUR
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
- Bench
- SANJAY A DESHMUKH
Holding
The delay in filing cross‑objections is condoned in the interest of justice.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of poor agriculturists whose lands had been acquired, filed civil applications seeking condonation of delay in filing cross‑objections. The respondents opposed, arguing no sufficient cause was shown. The court examined the applications and, relying on the precedent set in New Okhla Industrial Development Authority v. Rameshwar (2022) SCC Online SC 1599, held that in the interest of justice the delay should be condoned so that the petitioners' rights could be finally decided on merits. Consequently, the applications were allowed and the delay in filing cross‑objections was condoned. The court also ordered that notice be issued in the cross‑objections, with the AGP and counsel for each respondent waiving notice for the respective respondents.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in filing cross‑objections can be condoned under the principles of natural justice and the Civil Procedure Code.
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- cross objections
- civil procedure
- agriculturist rights
- interest of justice
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:3209
ca13691.25
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
930 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13691 OF 2025
IN X-OBJST/32211/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1345 OF 2010
IN/WITH FA/2233/2011
Jijabai Tukaram Halgare
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others.
…..
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13694 OF 2025
IN X-OBJST/32232/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1131 OF 2010
IN/WITH FA/1173/2010
Mukind Kerba Bansode
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others.
…
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13692 OF 2025
IN X-OBJST/32255/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1349 OF 2010
IN/WITH FA/1170/2010
Babruwahan Nivruti Tore
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others.
….
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13688 OF 2025
IN X-OBJST/32261/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1333 OF 2010
IN/WITH FA/1169/2010
Pandurang Baburao Shinde
(Died through L.Rs.) and another
VERSUS
ca13691.25
-2-
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others.
…..
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13690 OF 2025
IN X-OBJST/32235/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1347 OF 2010
IN/WITH FA/1171/2010
Balaji Nivratti Tore
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others.
…..
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13689 OF 2025
IN X-OBJST/32267/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1339 OF 2010
IN/WITH FA/1168/2010
Dattu Vitthalrao Shinde and another
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and others.
…..
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Sandeep C. Swami
AGP for Respondent No.1: Mr. V.V. Jahagirdar
Advocate for Respondent No.2: Mr. A.D. Soman
…..
CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
DATED : 23rd JANUARY, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. These are the civil applications filed for condonation of
delay caused in filing the cross objections. Perused the applications.
Heard learned advocates for both sides. Learned advocate for the
applicants submitted that the applicants are poor agriculturists whose
lands are acquired. They are not conversant with the provisions of
law and could not file the cross objections within time. Therefore, in
ca13691.25
-3-
the interest of justice, the applications deserve to be allowed.
2. Learned advocate for the respondents strongly opposed the
applications by submitting that there is no sufficient cause shown to
condone the delay. He therefore, prayed to reject the applications.
3. On perusal of applications and the law laid down in the
case of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority vs.
Rameshwar @ Ramesh Chandra Sharma (Dead) Through Legal
Heir and Another; 2022 SCC Online SC 1599, it would be proper to
condone the delay in the interest of justice as the claimants are poor
agriculturists and it would be proper to decide their rights finally on
merits. The applications are thus allowed. The delay caused in filing
the cross objections is condoned.
4. In cross objections, issue notice to the respondents.
Learned A.G.P. waives notice for respondent No.1 and learned
advocate Mr. Soman, waives notice for respondent No.2.
(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.)
rlj/
Checking your session…