EXCECUTIVE ENGINEER Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUSITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As these first appeals and civil application filed therein arise from the common judgment and award of the 2nd Extra Assistant Judge, Kheda at Nadiad, passed in group of Land Reference Cases No. 981/91 to 991/91, decided on 27th November, 1997, and further, as these matters arise out of one and same land acquisition, same are taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Before taking up these matters for consideration, I find that Civil Application No. 5264 of 1998 is not an application with prayer to condone delay caused in filing of the appeal. This civil application is filed in the first appeal No. 3044 of 1998 arising out of first reference Case No. 980/91 and prayer has been made therein for stay of the execution, operation and implementation of the award of the reference Court. Civil Application No. 5250/98 is the application which has been filed by the appellants for condonation of delay caused in filing of First Appeal No. 3044/98 arising out of land reference case No. 980/91. So that is the mistake which is there in the record of these civil applications, and placing of the same in the file. If we go by these facts, then Civil Application No. 5250/98 has to be numbered as 5264/98 and Civil Application No. 5264/98 should have been numbered as 5250/98. These facts have been mentioned only to point out how casually and mechanically matters are being taken and dealt with by the Registry of this Court. However, from the record I find that in all these appeals there are civil applications for condonation of delay and for stay of execution of the decree. Ignoring this wrong registration of civil application as aforesaid, I proceed to consider these matters on merits.

(3.) The aware in this case has been passed on 27th November, 1997 and these appeals are presented in this Court on 15th June 1998. Office has reported that these appeals are barred by 38 days. The office has pointed out another objection that proper and full Court fees is not paid on memo. This is another set of appeals where the same have not only been presented beyond limitation, but only a Court fees stamp of Rs. 5 has been affixed on the memo of these appeals. This way of filing of appeals in the High Court, which is a Court of record, by the State of Gujarat is nothing but as if throwing waste papers to the dust bin. What the State of Gujarat has considered this Court is clearly borne out from the manner in which they are presenting appeals in this Court.