TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 1908
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the special leave petitions before this Court challenging the impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court. There is a further delay of 193, 224 and 142 days respectively in refiling the special leave petitions. 3.1. The application/applications for condonation of delay is/are vehemently opposed by the respondents herein. Therefore, this Court is first required to consider and decide the application/applications submitted by the petitioners/applicants praying to condone the huge delay of 7534, 7542 and 7886 days respectively in preferring the special leave petitions. 4. Shri Rishi Malhotra, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respective petitioners has vehemently submitted that the lands of the respective petitioners have been compulsorily acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, and therefore, they are entitled to the fair compensation for the lands acquired. It is submitted that the dispute is with respect to the lands acquired of village Gulsitapur and Tilpta which are only 4 kms. away from village Kasna. It is submitted that the location wise the lands of village Gulsitapur and Tilpta were better located and were abutting the natio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....submitted that merely because in view of the subsequent decision in the case of lands acquired of another village, relying upon which the petitioners have preferred the present petitions, huge delay of approximately 21 years may not be condoned. 5.3 It is further submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that even otherwise the reliance placed upon the decisions of the High Court and this Court is with respect to entirely different village, i.e., village Kasna and that too in respect of the land which was acquired after about four years of acquisition of the petitioners' land. It is submitted that therefore the lands acquired of village Kasna are not comparable at all with respect to the lands acquired of village Gulsitapur and Tilpta. 5.4 It is further submitted that so far as the impugned common judgment and order dated 2.4.1996 is concerned, as such, the same has attained finality. It is submitted that not only the petitioners accepted the compensation but after the said judgment was delivered by the High Court no special leave petition has been filed by the present petitioners all these years. It is submitted that therefore they have acquiesced with the i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e petitions. It is submitted that in the relied upon cases this Court was satisfied on the sufficient cause for delay. It is submitted that in the relied upon cases the parity was claimed with respect to the land acquired under the very notification and it was pointed out that due to poverty and financial difficulty some of the land owners whose land was acquired under the same notification could not prefer the appeals earlier and they preferred the appeals subsequently and claimed parity of compensation at par with the lands acquired under the very notification. It is submitted that in the present case the petitioners are claiming the parity in compensation with respect to the land acquired of another village and that too the land in the said village was acquired after a period of four years and location wise etc. the lands are different. It is submitted that therefore on facts the same shall not be applicable to the facts of the case on hand. 5.9 Making the above submissions, it is prayed to dismiss the present applications for condonation of delay and consequently dismiss the special leave petitions as barred by limitation. 6. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... fact that it was only in December, 2016, the claimants pertaining to village Kasana got the enhanced compensation from this Hon'ble Court to the tune of Rs. 65/­ per sq. yard. The petitioners herein came to know about the said fact in the month of January, 2017 causing not only lots of heartburn but spelling miseries over them. It took not only lots of courage in mustering support from number of affected families but also it took time for the petitioners to collectively file the instant special leave petition claiming not only the enhanced compensation but also parity with regard to the compensation awarded to their co­villagers at village Kasana." 7.1 That thereafter the petitioners have stated that though there is a reasonable case made out by the petitioners to get the enhanced compensation to the tune of Rs. 65/­ per square yard, but fairly enough in order to balance the equity, this Court may not grant interest from the date of the judgment of the High Court i.e., 2.4.1996 till the filing of the special leave petitions before this Court. Except the explanation in paragraph 3, reproduced hereinabove, there is no other explanation whatsoever explaining t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nforce his legal right after the period of limitation is over, however, subject to the prayer for condonation of delay and if there is a justifiable explanation for bringing the action after the prescribed period of limitation is over and sufficient cause is shown, the court may condone the delay. Therefore, in a case where the period of limitation is prescribed and the action is not brought within the period of limitation and subsequently proceedings are initiated after the period of limitation along with the prayer for condonation of delay, in that case, the applicant has to make out a sufficient cause and justify the cause for delay with a proper explanation. It is not that in each and every case despite the sufficient cause is not shown and the delay is not properly explained, the court may condone the delay. To make out a case for condonation of delay, the applicant has to make out a sufficient cause/reason which prevented him in initiating the proceedings within the period of limitation. Otherwise, he will be accused of gross negligence. If the aggrieved party does not initiate the proceedings within the period of limitation without any sufficient cause, he can be denied the ....