Full Text
± LA.App.37/2013 NARESH KUMAR KHATRT (D) THR. LRs
.. . . .....Appellants
Through: Mr. S.K.Yadav, Advocate.
Through: Mr. Sanjay Sahay, Advocate S for the Respondent No.1.
Mr. D.K.Singh, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.
ORDER (ORAL)
REVA KHETRAPAL, J.
CM No.3117/2013
JUDGMENT
1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 1877 days in filing the appeal. It is stated by the Appellants that the cause of delay in filing the appeal was that the counsel before the Reference Court did not inform the Appellants about the decision of the case in time and also did not guide the Appellants about filing of the appeal before this Court against the impugned judgment. It is further stated by the Appellants that due to financial crisis they could not take timely actiOn. However, after coming to know the decision of the Reference LA.APP.37/2013 • Pagelof[3] 2013:DHC:7897 Court, the Appellants immediately filed the present appeal. • The application is supported by the Affidavit of the Appellants. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing the • appeal is condoned subject to the condition that the Appellants shall not bentitled to interest for the aforesaid period. Application stands disposed of LA.APP. 37/2013 The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment/decree dated 20.12.07 passed by the Reference Court on the ground that the learned Additional District Judge erred in holding the correct share of the LRs of the Appellant. Aggrieved by the wrong apportionment of the share, the Appellants filed a Review Application before the said Court. However, the learned ADJ dismissed the said Review Application on 241h September, 2012, on account of delay in filing the same. In the present Appeal the Appellants seek remand of the present case to the Reference Court for considering • apportionment in respect of the sharef of the Appellants under Section 30- 31 of the Land Acquisition Act in accordance with law. Upon issuance of the notice to the Respondents, the learned counsel for the Respondents does not oppose the remand of the matter to the Reference Court for afresh determination of the shares of the Appellants. ii H LA. APP. 3712013 It is accordingly directed that the matter be remitted back to the learned ADJ to decide the issue of shares of the Appellants afresh after hearing the parties. LA.APP. 37/2013 stands disposed of accordingly.
R VA KHETRAPAL (JUDGE) March, 2013 S