1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CA Nos.919/07; 917/07; 918/07 in FA ST. NO.22023/2006. CA Nos.914/07; 912/07; 913/07 in FA ST. NO.22019/2006. Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court s’ Orders or directions and Court’s or Judge’s Order Registrar s Orders.. ’ CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED : 16th JUNE, 2009 --- P.C.:- 1) Heard Counsel representing the acquiring body/appellant. It is a statutory body and legal entity which has been established by virtue of Govt. Notification dated 1st October, 1998 and Section 15 of the Act, provides liability of the Corporation to meet the claims of the claimant in relation to acquired property by the Govt. for its projects. 2) The acquiring body was not party before the Reference court. The matter revolves to acquisition through Govt. for construction of Medium Project, Shivna Takli at 2 Jaitapur, Tq. Kannad, District Aurangabad. Since the interests of the Corporation/acquiring body are adversely affected, leave to file appeal is granted. Application allowed. CA to that effect allowed. 3) There is delay of 221 and 167 days in respective matters. Thopugh I find that the acquiring body was not a party to the Reference whereby there is enhancement, however, the delay even thereafter is not properly explained. It is difficult to be condoned and consequently, the applications for condonation of delay are rejected. The order under challenge indicate that so far as land Gut No. 8 is concerned, additional compensation was Rs. 3,500/-; for land Gut No. 9, it was Rs. 3,600/- and in respect of land Gut No.10, it was Rs. 6,700/-. The learned Judge was obvious in not considering grant of interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, attributing slumber on the part of the claimants in diligently attending the matter. The order even otherwise requires no interference. Delay being not 3 explained, the applications for condonation of delay rejected. Consequently, the Appeal as well as CA for Stay also dismissed. (K.U. CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/bdv/ca919.07