1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO.572 OF 2009. (Raghoji Khansole Vs. State of Mah. and Anr.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 8th January, 2010. ... 1) Heard Mr.AG Mukhedkar, learned counsel for the appellant/original claimant and Mr. VD Rakh, learned AGP for the respondents. 2) Dismissal of LAR by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded, by order dated 12th September, 1997 on the point of delay in lodging the Reference before the Collector, is the subject of challenge in this appeal. 3) The factual details in the matter is, notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued upon the claimant on 30th June, 1992 and the claimant was expected to lodge the petition up to 12th August, 1992. However, the petitions are subsequently filed on 21st September, 1992. There is delay of one month and nine days in taking the recourse of lodging the Land 2 Reference in terms of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition act. 4) The contention agitated by the learned Counsel, that there were no details in the notice under Section 12 of the Act as to price or as to acreage of lands acquired, has been rightly negatived by the learned Judge of the Reference court while answering the same in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the order. I do not see that such observation needs any interference. The laxity shown by the claimant, cannot be dispensed with or given benefit even in terms of the law of limitation, as has been coined, as it is not permissible. 5) No merit in the First Appeal, it is dismissed. No costs. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/fa572.09