- (1.) This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated. September 24, 1986, passed in R. F. A. No. 1770 of 1986, where by the said appeal arising out of the land acquisition case, was dismissed as barred by time.
(2.) On a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, award was given on October 8, 1985. Copy of that award was applied for on April 3, 1986, which was prepared on April 7, 1986, and was delivered to the claimants on April 30, 1986, Regular First Appeal in this Court was filed on July 5, 1986, along with an application under sections 5 of the Limitation Act, for condonation of delay. It was stated in the application that since several cases arising out of the same notification were being decided in small batches by the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon, and it was subsequently in the month of March 86, that the appellant learnt of the judgment in this case; hence the application for obtaining a certified copy of the judgment could not be filed earlier. However, according to the learned Single Judge, even if this be accepted as correct, a reading of the application would show that there was no explanation for the delay in the filing of this appeal from the date of the delivery of the copy of the judgment on April 30, 1986. Therefore, it was held that in the absence of any such explanation, there was clearly no warrant for condonation of delay in the filing of the appeal. The other contention raised on behalf of the appellant that the other landowners whose land has already been acquired the same notification had already filed appeals in this Court and that being so, under the amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The appellant also would be entitled to the same market value as is determined in those cases, it was observed by the learned Single Judge, "It cannot be taken to mean that laws of limitation ceases to apply in a case like the present." Consequently, the application for condonation of delay was dismissed.
(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in a similar situation, in R.F.A. No. 1826 of 1984 which was also dismissed as barred by time, when the parties approached the Supreme Court, the delay was condoned and the case was remanded for decision on merits. Vide order dated April 16, 1985, in Civil Appeal No. 1588 of 1981, it has been observed by the Supreme Court, "We are of the view that the delay in filing the appeal should have been condoned on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case and particularly in view of the fact that this is a case of acquisition of an adjoining piece of land arising out of the same notification. We, therefore, allow the appeal, condone the delay and set aside the order passed by the High Court refusing to condone the delay and after condoning the delay, we send the case back to the High Court so that a Division Bench of the High Court may bear and dispose of it on merits after taking into account the relevant factors ..." The learned counsel for the appellant also cited Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Katiji, 1987 AIR(SC) 1353 to contend that liberal approach should be made in such like cases. Reference was also made to Bhag Singh v. Union Territory of Chandgarh., 1985 AIR(SC) 1576 ;