Bombay High Court
DEVI MANDIR SANSTHAN ROHINA (BK) THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT SURESH SHESHRAO GAWALIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The delay is condoned subject to the applicant’s undertaking not to claim statutory benefits for the delayed period.
Summary
The applicant, Devi Mandir Sansthan Rohina (BK), filed an application seeking condonation of a 3,409‑day delay in filing its first appeal. The delay was attributed to the applicants' loss of land and income following a land acquisition, which left them unable to afford litigation costs. The court examined the explanation and found it satisfactory, imposing a condition that the applicants provide an undertaking not to claim any statutory benefits for the delayed period. The applicant had already furnished the required undertaking to the Registrar (Judicial). Consequently, the court disposed of the application, granting condonation and directing that the appeal be admitted after removal of any office objections.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 3,409 days in filing a first appeal can be condoned under the Civil Procedure Code
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- first appeal
- civil procedure
- land acquisition
- statutory benefits
- undertaking
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:38241
1 960 CA 2441-2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
960 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2441 OF 2026
IN FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 5029 OF 2026
DEVI MANDIR SANSTHAN ROHINA (BK) THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT
SURESH SHESHRAO GAWALI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR JALNA
AND OTHERS
…
Mr. Arun H. Koralkar – Advocate for Applicant
Ms. Vaishali S. Chaudhary – AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2/State
…
CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
DATE : 21.08.2026
PER COURT :
1. This application is filed for condonation of delay of 3409 days in
filing the First Appeal. Although respondent No.3 is served, none appears
for respondent No.3/acquiring body. Learned A.G.P. appears for
respondent Nos.1 and 2/State.
2. The delay has been explained by the applicants in paragraphs 3
and 4 of the application. It is contended that the applicants are
agriculturists and on account of the acquisition of their lands, they have
become landless and have no source of income. They could not afford to
approach the Court and bear the litigation expenses, which resulted in
the delay.
2 960 CA 2441-2026.odt
3. Considering the satisfactory explanation given and the
circumstances stated in the application, the delay of 3409 days deserves
to be condoned, subject to the condition that the claimants shall furnish
an undertaking to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court
that they shall not claim any statutory benefit for the delayed period,
within a period of four (4) weeks from today.
4. Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have
already furnished the said undertaking before the Registrar (Judicial) of
this Court.
5. In view of the same, the application stands disposed of.
6. The appeal be placed for admission after removal of office
objections, if any, on 04.09.2026.
[ MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. ]
Pooja Kale/
Checking your session…