FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURNAGABAD Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directios and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS __________________________________________________________________________________________ 1225 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4551 OF 2011 ,In FAST/5806/2011 ,With CA/4553/2011 ,In FAST/5811/2011 ,With CA/4555/2011 ,In FAST/5793/2011 ,With CA/4557/2011 ,In FAST/5798/2011 , With CA/4559/2011 ,In FAST/5738/2011 , With CA/4561/2011 ,In FAST/5833/2011 ,With CA/4563/2011 ,In FAST/5830/2011 ,With CA/4565/2011 ,In FAST/5822/2011 With CA/4567/2011 ,In FAST/5817/2011 With CA/4569/2011 ,In FAST/5789/2011 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AD ANR VERSUS SANGRAM RAOSAHEB KADAM ... Advocate for applicant(s) : Mr. K.S. Patil, AGP ... CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. Dated: August 2, 2011 ... 1 These are the applications seeking condonation of delay of 1972 days occurred in presenting the appeal. 2 Heard learned AGP for the State. Judgment and award in the group of reference applications was passed on 8-7-2005. The Law and Judiciary department resolved to file appeal and accordingly informed regarding the same to the the office of the Government Pleader vide communication dated 3-1-2006. However, it took about five years thereafter for the State FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURNAGABAD Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directios and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS __________________________________________________________________________________________ to actually present the appeal and thus, the appeal was presented on 1-3-2011. There are absolutely no reasons stated in the application explaining the huge delay of more than five years occurred in presenting the appeals. Even on considering the merits of the controversy, appeals do not deserve favourable consideration. The Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation at the rate of Rs. 190/- per R whereas reference court has determined market value of the acquired lands at Rs. 450/- per R. Considering the meager amount of enhancement permitted by the reference court, delay occurred in presenting the appeals does not deserve favourable consideration. 3 Applications tendered by the State seeking condonation of delay of 1972 days occurred in presenting the appeals stand rejected. In view of rejection of applications seeking condonation of delay, appeals presented by the State need not be registered. Applicant / State shall be entitled to refund of court fees, in accordance with rules. ( R.M. BORDE, J. ) dyb