Gopal Decd Thru Lrs & Ors v. Union of India

1. This is an application under Section 5 ofthe Limitation Act read with Section 151 CPC for condonation of delay in filing the Appeal.

2. Heard the counsel for the Appellants, who points out that it was on account of the mistake of the counsel that the Appeal was not filed within time and that this aspect of the matter has been dealt with elaborately in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the present application. The application is supported by the Affidavit ofthe Appellants as well as by the Affidavit of the counsel Shri D.S. Lakra, Advocate. In his Affidavit, Shri D.S. Lakra, Advocate 2013:DHC:7840 has unequivocally stated that the appeal was prepared by him, which along with the stamp papers and other documents was kept by him in a file for the purpose of being filed, but at the time ofrenovation ofhis office thesaid file gotmixed upwith a bunch of other files which were decided matters of the other 166 cases of the said Village and of Village Bakarwala. It was only when he accidently came across the file and found the stamp papers and appeal papers lying therein that he realized that considerable delay had been caused in the filing of the appeal.

3. No reason has been pointed out to me as to why I should disbelieve the Affidavit ofthe counsel for the Appellants. Even otherwise, the settled legal position is that the litigant cannot suffer for the fault of his counsel. More so, when the history of the case shows that the litigants in the instant case, i.e., the Appellants have been pursuing the litigation at all levels, i.e., before the Reference Court and thereafter in review, and now before this Court.

4. For the aforesaid reasons, the delay in filing the Appeal is condoned.

5. Application stands disposed of LA.APP. 266/2012

1. Counsel for the Appellants states and it is not disputed by Mr. A.S. Rao, Law Officer that the instant Appeal is covered by the judgment of this Court rendered in Jamna vs. Union ofIndia and Others, LA. APP. 784/2005 decided on 8'^ July, 2011, wherein for land falling under Category 'A' in Village Mundka the fair market value was fixed by this Court at ? 2,49,408.75 per bigha, i.e., ? 11,97,162/- per acre and for Category 'B' lands, the fair market value was fixed at ^ 2,01,117/- per bigha, i.e., ^ 9,65,361.60 per acre as on the date ofthe notification, i.e., 25.02.1997.

2. Since the case of the Appellants also pertains to Village Mundka and the notification dated 25.02.1997, the present appeal is covered by Jamna's case (supra). Accordingly, the Appellants are held entitled to receive compensation in terms of Jamna's case (supra). However, in view ofthe delay caused in filing the Appeal, the Appellants will not be entitled to interest for the period of delay.

3. Appeal stands disposed ofin the above terms.,JL R"EVAKHETRAPAX, J. FEBRUARY 27, 2013 km ffiVA KHETRAPAX,