1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8474 OF 2007 State of Maharashtra & Anr. vs. Vimalbai S. Dipake Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. FEBRUARY 14, 2008. Heard Shri Kilor, Advocate for the respondent and AGP for the State. The prayer made by the State Government is to condone delay of 1134 days in filing appeal under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Reference Court has by impugned judgment dated 20.3.2004 granted enhanced amount of Rs. 35,549/- to the respondent. The compensation is towards land and also towards well, pipeline, electrical pump etc. The amount also includes amount of about Rs.28,000/- on account solatium under Section 23(2) and additional compensation under Section 23(1-A) of Land Acquisition Act. The suit field measured 56 R i.e. little more about 1 Acre. The perusal of para 2 of the affidavit shows that intimation of delivery of 2 said judgment itself was received by the office of Law and Judiciary Department more than two years after the decision. Thereafter the Law and Judiciary Department has processed the matter further and it appears that application for certified copy was made on 10.10.2006 and copy was collected on 15.2.2007. The date on which the certified copy was ready for delivery is not mentioned. After the certified copy was received, the papers were not immediately supplied to the office of Government Pleader and it appears that thereafter amount was deposited in Bank and demand draft was collected on 2.3.2007 and thereafter papers were submitted to the office of Government Pleader for filing appeal. The date on which papers were submitted is not clear. The application for condonation of delay appears to have been drafted on 22.6.2007 and after swearing it is filed on 27.7.2007. It is, therefore, apparent that at each stage there is a delay which could have been avoided and has not been explained. Looking to the quantum of enhancement granted and the fact that delay is of about three years, I find that the delay cannot be condoned. 3 There are no just and sufficient reasons made out in the application. Civil Application is rejected. JUDGE *GS.