1 CA No.7136.10 & Ors. 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 1090. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.7136 OF 2010 ,In FAST/9880/2010 ,With CA/7137/2010 ,In FAST/9926/2010 ,With CA/7138/2010 ,In FAST/9933/2010 ,With CA/7139/2010 ,In FAST/9929/2010 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AD ORS VERSUS SHRIPATI GOPALRAOL CHATE DED TH LRS VENKATI SRIPATI CHATE AND ANR. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.KS Patil, AGP for State. *** CORAM: R.M.BORDE ,J. DATE : 29 th JULY, 2011. PER COURT: 1) These are the applications presented by the State, seeking condonation of delay of 1499 days occurred in presenting the appeals. The Reference Court delivered the judgment on 30.11.2005; whereas application for certified copy itself was presented three years there after, i.e. On 4.9.2008. The copies were collected on 10.09.2008. The proposal, in fact was received in the year 2006 by teh office of Government Pleader in respect of presentation of the appeals, however, the appeals were presented in the year 2010. There are absolutely no justifiable reasons to condone the delay of about five years that has occurred in presenting the appeals. The reasons recorded in the applications are devoid of substance and are not worthy of acceptance. The applications, seeking condonation of delay are devoid of substance. Apart from this aspect, the enhancement in the amount of compensation that 2 CA No.7136.10 & Ors. has been awarded by the Reference Court is also quite meagre and moderate. The Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation @ Rs.170 and Rs.180/- per R. land, which has been enhanced by the Reference court to Rs.360/- per R. Considering the fact that a very small pieces of land belonging to the claimants have been acquired and quite meagre amount of enhanced compensation has been permitted by the Reference Court thereby entitling the claimants to receive palty sums, I do not deem it proper to cause interference in these applications. The applications presented by the State are devoid of substance hence stand rejected. 2) Consequently, the appeals shall not be registered. 3) The State Government is entitled to claim for refund of court fees as per the Rules. (R.M.BORDE,J.) bdv/