Bombay High Court
EX. ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, OSMANABAD UNDER G.M.I.D.C. AURAGABAD AND ORSversusVITHAL MAHADEO SUKALE
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The Court held that the 189‑day delay in filing the first appeal is condonable as sufficient cause was shown and the applicant being the acquiring authority, in line with Supreme Court precedent.
Summary
The applicant, an ex‑engineer of the Minor Irrigation Division, filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 189‑day delay in filing a first appeal. Service of notice was effected on the respondent, Vithal Mahadeo Sukale, but no appearance was made. The applicant’s counsel argued that the delay was neither deliberate nor due to any lethargy on the part of the applicant. The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Sheo Raj Singh v. Union of India, where a 479‑day delay was condoned, and considered that the applicant, being the acquiring authority, had shown sufficient cause. Accordingly, the Court allowed the application, condoning the delay and ordering that the first appeal be registered with notice to the respondent. The matter was set for return on 6 October 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 189 days in filing a first appeal can be condoned under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- first appeal
- civil procedure
- high court
- supreme court precedent
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:41840
1
933 CA 6983 OF 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
933 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6983 OF 2023
IN FAST/16176/2023
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6982 OF 2023
IN FAST/16176/2023
EX. ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION,
OSMANABAD UNDER G.M.I.D.C. AURAGABAD AND ORS
VERSUS
VITHAL MAHADEO SUKALE
...
Mr. B. R. Survase, Advocate for Applicant
…
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATED : 8th September 2026
P.C. :-
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6982 OF 2023
. This Civil Application is filed seeking condonation of
delay of 189 days in filing the First Appeal. Despite service to
respondent/claimant on more than one occasion, nobody
caused appearance.
2. Mr. B. R. Survase, learned Advocate for the applicant –
acquiring submits that the delay caused in filing the appeal is
neither deliberate nor attributable to any lethargy on the part
of the applicant.
2
933 CA 6983 OF 2023
3. A profitable reference can be made to the Judgment &
Order passed by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of
Sheo Raj Singh (Deceased through LRs.) & Ors. V/s Union of
India and ors. [Civil Appeal No.5867 of 2015 dated 09-10-
2023]. The Honorable Supreme Court was dealing with an
Appeal wherein High Court’s order condoning delay of 479
days caused in filing a First Appeal by the Government against
a Judgment & Award passed in Land Acquisition Reference
was under challenge.
4. For the reasons stated in the application and
considering the fact that the applicant is the acquiring body, I
am satisfied that sufficient cause is shown for condonation of
delay. Hence, the Civil Application is allowed. The delay
caused in filing the First Appeal stands condoned.
5. First Appeal be registered.
FIRST APPEAL
6. Issue notice to the respondent, returnable on
06.10.2026.
( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. )
PRW
Checking your session…