1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CA NOs. 3715/2009; 3716/2009 IN FA ST NO.7205/2009; ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE: 12 th June, 2009. ... 1) Heard Mr.Gavane, learned AGP for State. 2) There is delay of 436 days in causing to file the first appeal. Normally, the exorbitant delay, is not condoned, however, in the fact situation where the L.A.R.No. 163/1991 is decided on 22nd October, 2007, the concerned AGP has intimated the office of the applicant and thereafter the copy of the application was moved. The matter was moved to the higher authorities in Government and there has been delay in taking the decision. The delay of 436 days is properly explained. That apart, the AGP has invited my attention to paragraph 11 of the judgment under challenge wherein the learned Reference Court has apparently granted the enhancement without there being any comparable sale instances in the matter. The delay being properly explained, and the rights of the acquiring 2 body should not be foreclosed, the delay is condoned. The application is allowed as above. 3) Heard learned APP and learned Counsel for the claimant/respondent on application for stay. 4) Upon State depositing entire amount challenged in the appeal within two months from today, the execution of judgment under challenge is stayed. CA for stay is allowed as above. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE bdv/ca3715.09