STATE OF M.P. Vs. SAVJIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the Award dated 21.7.1994 passed by Additional Judge, Mhow to the Court of District Judge, Indore in Reference Case No. 331 of 1988. The appeal is barred by time and is not accompanied by requisite application for condoantion of delay. Shri Gupta prayed for time to file application which prayer is rejected.

(2.) THE Appellants -State of Madhya Pradesh are aggrieved by the Award passed by the Reference Court under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Challenge is made against the enhancement in this appeal under section 54. But the appeal, as stated in Memorandum of Appeal itself, is barred by 134 days. It is averred in the Memorandum that time is consumed in procuring requisite sanction from Law Department. It is indeed strange to find mention in the Memo that application for condonation of delay will be filed at subsequent stage. Manifestly, this approach is repugnant to procedural law.

(3.) THE appeal is not accompanied by requisite application and affidavit setting forth the facts of reliance. In fact, there is yet no such application, no proper particular in proof of sufficiency of cause to justify condonation of delay extending to 134 days i.e. about 4 1/2 months and no supporting affidavit of concerning authority. Proof of sufficient cause is a condition precedent. Expiration of period of limitation results in accrual of valuable right in favour of successful party and this right is not liable to be light heartedly disturbed. Extension of time cannot be claimed or conferred mechanically. Discretionary jurisdiction has to be on sound judicial principles.