Bombay High Court

DATTA S/O SHAMRAO SAKALKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Bench: NEERAJ P DHOTE

Holding

The court condoned the delay and allowed the appeal but denied interest and statutory benefits to the applicant.

Summary

The applicant, Datta, filed an application seeking condonation of an 846‑day delay in filing a first appeal against the judgment of the lower court. The respondent states were represented by an Additional Government Pleader, while the acquiring body was not present despite service. The court examined the reasons provided for the delay and considered whether equity warranted condonation. It allowed the application in accordance with Prayer Clause B, thereby permitting the appeal to proceed. However, the court held that the applicant would not be entitled to interest or any statutory benefits for the period of delay.

Issues considered

Whether the court should condone an 846‑day delay in filing the first appeal.
Whether the applicant is entitled to interest and statutory benefits for the delayed period.

Subjects

condonation of delay
first appeal
civil procedure
interest
statutory benefits

Judgment

                                                              908-CA-4889-2020.odt


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

             908 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4889 OF 2020
                        IN FAST/9482/2019
                   Datta S/o Shamrao Sakalkar
                            VERSUS
             The State Of Maharashtra And Others
                               …..
Mr. Jadhav Kailas B, Advocate for Applicant
Ms. M. L. Sangit, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2
                               …..
                              CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
                               DATE          :   25.06.2026

PER COURT :

1.     This is an Application for condonation of delay of 846 days in
preferring the First Appeal by the Original Claimant.


2.     The learned AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 is present.


3.     None for Respondent No.3 – Acquiring Body, though served.


4.     For the reasons mentioned in the Application, the Application
is allowed in terms of Prayer Clause – ‘B’.

5.     The Applicant shall not be entitled for the interest and
statutory benefits for the delayed period.

6.     A copy of this order shall be placed with the Appeal Memo.




                                         [NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.]


Sameer/June-2026                  1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…