1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1260 OF 2006 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 2501 of 2006 The State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Osmanabad. ..Applicant (Orig.Resp.) VERSUS Ashok s/o Tukaram Jadhav & ors. ..Respondents (Orig.Claimants) ..... Shri K.B.Choudhary, A.G.P. for the applicant Shri N.S.Kadam, advocate for respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4 Application dismissed against respondent no.2 ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 6th November, 2009 PER COURT : 1 Perused. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Taken up for final hearing with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. Heard respective counsel for the parties. 2 The applicant State (Orig.respondent) has preferred the present application for condonation of delay of 3849 days 2 occurred in filing the accompanying First Appeal, challenging the judgment and award dated 28.4.1995 rendered by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad in L.A.R. No. 218 of 1993. 3 The applicant states that after passing the aforesaid judgment and award, the applicant moved the Law and Judiciary Department through the office of the District Government Pleader, Osmanabad and the proposal was placed before the Judicial Cell, which took the decision that it is not a fit case for filing appeal before this court. The applicant also submits that the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad made grievance before the Judicial Cell and brought to the notice of all the concerned that the excessive compensation is awarded by the learned court below and, therefore, the proposal needs reconsideration. The Judicial Cell headed by Joint Secretary, Law and Judiciary Department reconsidered the proposal of appeal in its meeting dated 21.10.1997, but no decision was arrived at to acquiesce in the award. 4 The applicant further submits that while deciding First Appeal Nos. 517 of 1997 and 537 of 1997 on 10.4.2003 arising out of companion Land References bearing Nos. 113 of 1994 and 114 of 1994, this Court directed the Collector to inquire into and 3 submit report as regards other companion References. Accordingly, the Law and Judiciary Department submitted report on 1.7.2003 stating the facts and further decision to file appeals in 22 companion Land References. As per the proposal in respect of present appeal has been sanctioned by the Law and Judiciary Department on 27.6.2003 and same was forwarded to the office of the Government Pleader for preparing and filing the First Appeal. 5 Accordingly, it is submitted that First Appeal was drafted on 20.7.2003, but same could not be filed for want of certified copies of the impugned judgment and award. The applicant submits that the applicant made various efforts and sent reminders and made telephone calls, despite that could not obtain the certified copies of the impugned judgment and award and ultimately appeal came to be filed on 7.2.2006 after delay of 3849 days and the applicant prays to condone the said delay. 6 Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that the present application bears no substance and same is devoid of any merits and same be rejected. Learned counsel for the respondents pointed out that although after reconsideration proposal for filing 4 the appeal was sanctioned by the Law and Judiciary Department on 27.6.2003 the accompanying First Appeal was not filed by the applicant till 7.2.2006 and the applicant has miserably failed to explain the said delay. Hence, the respondents submitted that present application be dismissed. 7 Considering the averments in the application and also considering the rival submissions, it is apparent that in pursuance of the order passed by this Court on 10.4.2003 in First Appeal Nos. 517 and 537 of 1997 arising out of companion Land References directing the collector to inquire into and submit the report as regards other companion Land References, the Joint Secretary, Law and Judiciary Department, Aurangabad submitted the report to this court on 1.7.2003 stating the above facts and further decision to file appeals in 22 companion Land References and sanction of proposal by the Law and Judiciary Department on 27.6.2003 as averred by the applicant in the present application. However, it appears that even after 27.6.2003 the applicant failed to file the accompanying First Appeal till 7.2.2006, perhaps for want of certified copies of judgment and award. However, the applicant has miserably failed to explain the said substantial period of delay from 27.6.2003 to 7.2.2006 and merely want of certified copies for the period of said substantial period cannot be 5 the ground for condonation of delay i.e. more than 2½ years. 8 In the circumstances, it is apparent that the delay of 3849 days is apparently inordinate and cannot be construed as intentional. Hence, the present application bears no substance and same is devoid of any merits and, therefore, same deserves to be rejected and accordingly same stands rejected. Consequently, the registration of the First Appeal stands refused. Rule is discharged accordingly. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) dbm/ca1260.06