Bombay High Court

MOTILAL ARJUN MALI.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR JALGAON AND ORS.

Disposal: Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Bench: S G CHAPALGAONKAR

Holding

The Court condoned the delay in filing the appeals, subject to an undertaking by the applicants not to claim interest or statutory benefits.

Summary

The applicants, Sahebrao Arjun Mali, Motilal Arun Mali and Kailas Bhaskar Patil, sought condonation of a 4,943‑day delay in filing appeals against judgments and awards of a reference court concerning compensation for acquired land. They claimed the delay was unintentional, arising from reliance on their advocate to file the appeals, and asserted they would not seek interest or statutory benefits if the delay were condoned. The State of Maharashtra, represented by its Collector and counsel, opposed the condonation, arguing the explanation was insufficient. The Court examined the reasons provided, noted they were unchallenged, and considered the nature of the land‑acquisition litigation. It therefore granted condonation, imposing a condition that the applicants file an undertaking not to claim interest or statutory benefits should they obtain an enhanced award, to be filed within six weeks.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 4,943 days in filing appeals can be condoned under the applicable procedural law.
Whether the applicants may be barred from claiming interest or statutory benefits for the period of delay if condonation is granted.

Subjects

condonation of delay
civil appeal
land acquisition
compensation
interest
statutory benefit
procedural law

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:34203

1 ca 3446.2026+2.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

930 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3446 OF 2026 IN FAST/4323/2026
Sahebrao Arjun Mali.
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Collector Jalgaon And Ors.
…
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3447 OF 2026 IN FAST/4319/2026
Motilal Arun Mali
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Collector Jalgaon And Ors.
...
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3445 OF 2026 IN FAST/4314/2026
Kailas Bhaskar Patil (Mahajan)
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Collector Jalgaon And Ors.
…
Mr. Vijay Bhalerao Patil, Advocate for Applicants.
Mr. K.S. Patil AGP for respondent State
Mr. Subhash S. Chillarge, Advocate for Respondent No.3.
...
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
DATED : 6th August, 2026
…
P.C.:-
1. Heard learned Advocates appearing for respective parties.

2. By these applications, applicant/s seek to condone the delay
of 4943 days caused in filing Appeals.

3. Perused reasons as stated in applications. The applicants state
that they had obtained certified copies of judgment and Award
passed by Reference Court. Thereafter, they had handed over
documents to Advocate for filing First Appeals. Their applications
for delay condonation in First Appeals were verified. They were
under bonafide impression that process of filing Appeals alongwith
delay condonation applications is going on. Lastly, they came to
know that no Appeals are filed on their behalf. Thereafter, they
2 ca 3446.2026+2.odt

collected all documents from Advocate and filed Appeals. The delay
caused in filing Appeals is not intentional and deliberate.

4. The learned Advocate appearing for applicant/s during
course of argument submits that applicant/s would not claim
interest and statutory benefit for delayed period, in case delay is
condoned and Appeals are taken up for hearing on merits.

5. Per contra, Mr. Chillarge, learned Advocate appearing for
Acquiring Body vehemently opposed applications. He submits that
explanation tendered by applicants does not constitute sufficient
cause to condone inordinate delay caused in filing Appeals.

6. Having considered submissions advanced by learned
Advocates appearing for respective parties, it can be observed that
applicants have stipulated reasons for inordinate delay from
paragraph nos.6 to 14 of applications. The reasons as stated are not
controverted by respondent by filing affidavit-in-reply. The
applicants are litigating for getting just compensation of acquired
land. Considering nature of litigation and reasons as stated in
applications, this Court finds that delay can be condoned by
imposing necessary condition that would protect interest of
respondent/Authorities.

7. In result, Civil Applications are allowed. Delay of 4943 days
caused in filing Appeals is condoned subject to condition that each
of applicants files independent undertaking with Registrar (Judicial)
of this Court that, in case applicants succeed in Appeals and gets
enhanced Award, they shall not claim interest and statutory benefit
for delayed period. Such an undertaking to be filed within period of
six weeks from today.

(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
...
aaa/-

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…