Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/5755/2010 2/ 2 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 5755 of 2010
In
FIRST
APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 5770 of 2009
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
=========================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================
SPECIAL
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
KESARBA
UDESANG JITSANG WIFE - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance
:
MR NEERAJ
SONI, ASSTT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
for Petitioner(s) : 1 -
2.
None for Respondent(s) : 1,
UNSERVED-EXPIRED (R) for
Respondent(s) : 1.2.1
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1.2.2,
1.2.3,1.2.4
RULE UNSERVED for Respondent(s) : 1.2.5,1.2.6
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 24/01/2011
COMMON
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Present
application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been preferred
by the applicants – original opponents to condone the delay of
661 days in preferring the Appeal against the judgment and award
dated 30.10.2007 passed by the learned Additional District Judge,
Fast Track Court No.1, Bharuch in Land Reference Case No.1514/1998 to
1526/1998. Though served, nobody appears on behalf of respondent
Nos.1/1 to 1/4.
2. Respondent
Nos.1/5 and 1/6 are reported to have died. Despite the earlier
orders passed by this Court, no steps are taken by the appellants to
bring the heirs of respondent Nos.1/5 and 1/6 on record. Hence,
present application is dismissed as having been abated so far as
respondent Nos.1/5 and 1/6 are concerned. As such the estate is
already represented through other heirs.
3. Having
heard Shri Soni, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on
behalf of the applicants and considering the averments in the
application in support of the prayer to condone the delay, it appears
that a sufficient cause has been shown to condone the delay in
preferring the First Appeal. Even otherwise, so as to give one
additional opportunity to the applicants to submit the case on merits
rather than non-suiting them on technical ground of delay, delay
caused in preferring the First Appeal is hereby condoned. Rule is
made absolute accordingly. No costs.
(M.R.
Shah, J.)
*menon
Top