{1} ca659811.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6598 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL STNO.11931 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra and others Applicants Versus Ramprasad s/o Madanlal Soni Respondent WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6599 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL STNO.11953 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra and others Applicants Versus Govind Uttamrao Poul Respondent WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6600 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL STNO.11955 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra and others Applicants Versus Watsalabai Tukaram Poul (died) through L.Rs. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6601 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL STNO.11957 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra and others Applicants Versus Ganpat Tukaram Poul Respondent {2} ca659811.odt WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6602 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL STNO.11959 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra and others Applicants Versus Hanuman Narayansingh Chavan Respondent WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6603 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL STNO.11960 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra and others Applicants Versus Jagdish s/o Uttamrao Poul Respondent WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6604 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL STNO.11951 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra and others Applicants Versus Mahesh Ganpat Poul Respondent Mr.K.S.Patil, A.G.P. for applicants. CORAM : R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 03 rd August, 2011 PER COURT: 1 These are applications seeking condonation of delay of 1978 days occurred in presenting respective appeals. {3} ca659811.odt 2 The judgment and award under challenge is dated 31.08.2005. The Law & Judiciary Department of the State sanctioned the proposal for tendering appeals against the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court and communicated the same to the Office of Government Pleader at Aurangabad on 24.01.2006. The State Government, however, took about five years thereafter to present appeals and the appeals were in fact presented on 30.04.2011. There is absolutely no explanation for presenting the appeals after lapse of about six years from the date of passing of the award. The applications are devoid of substance. 3 Even on consideration of merits of the contentions, appeals do not deserve favourable consideration. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation @ Rs.250/- per are, whereas, the Reference Court has prescribed the rate of compensation of the acquired property @ Rs. 500/- per are. Considering the paltry sum, directed to be paid by way of enhancement, appeals do not deserve favourable consideration. 4 The applications seeking condonation of delay of 1978 days presented by the State, being devoid of substance, stands rejected. Appeals, therefore, need not be registered. Applicant-State shall be entitled to claim refund of court fees in accordance with rules. R.M.BORDE JUDGE adb/ca659811