SPB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 923 OF 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 923 OF 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 923 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 3729 OF 2008 FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 3729 OF 2008 FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 3729 OF 2008 Baban Sagu Sanas .. Appellant. v/s. The Land Acquisition Officer (No.17). Pune and others. .. Respondents. --- Mr. G.K.Maurya h/f. Smt. P.H.Potnis for the Appellant. Mr.A.R.Patil, AGP for the Respondent No.1. Mr.M.B.Kale h/f. U.B.Nighot for the Respondent No.2. --- CORAM : D.G.KARNIK,J. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK,J. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK,J. DATE : 10TH DECEMBER,2008 DATE : 10TH DECEMBER,2008 DATE : 10TH DECEMBER,2008 P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. This civil application is made by the applicant for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal against the decision of the reference court. Only ground for delay in the application is that of poverty. The applicant has alleged that he is a poor farmer and did not have money even to pay court fees and stamp and also to pay the Advocates fees and therefore, he could not file an appeal. - 2 - 2. Learned AGP appearing for the State contradicts this submission of the applicant and states that the said ground is false. He hands in a statement signed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer No.17, which shows that the applicant was paid in cash compensation of Rs.43,617/- by a cheque no. 376270 on 5th of October, 1996 as initial compensation for acquisition of the land. He further submits the enhanced compensation as was deposited in the reference court on 2nd of January, 2007. He hands in a copy of deposit receipt dated 2nd January, 2007 issued by the reference court for having received sum of Rs.92,58,833/-. The learned AGP submits that out of this compensation of Rs. 92,58,833/- an amount of Rs. 6,60,673/- pertains to the present applicant. The learned counsel for the applicants admits that the respondent has received a sum of Rs. 6,60,673/- from the reference court and the said amount withdrawn by the applicant on 18.10.2007. 3. The aforesaid facts clearly disclose that the poverty of the applicant was not a reason for the delay in filing the appeal. No other ground for condonation of delay is alleged. Sufficient reason for condonation of delay is not made out. The civil application is accordingly dismissed. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)