DALPAT SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is barred by 5391 days. The order impugned was passed by Civil Judge, Jodhpur a reference u/sec. 18 of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953 (for short "the Act" hereinafter) on 18. 9. 81. The present appeal has been filed on 23. 9. 96. The period of limitation for filing appeal against the order passed u/s 18 of the Act is 90 days and the appeal has been filed after 5481 days from the date of the order impugned. Hence, it is barred by limitation of 5391 days. An application u/sec. 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed by the appellant supported by his affidavit. The ground taken in the application for condonation of such inordinate delay is that the appellant has been discriminated in the matter of award of interest and the appellant came to know of this fact on last Deepawali. Certificate copy of the order was applied on 3. 8. 96 after the lapse of period of about 15 long years. However, it was made available to the appellant on the very day. The appellant filed a writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India in the year 1996 being S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2059/96, which was dismissed summarily on the ground of an alternative remedy being available to the petitioner appellant. Thereafter the appellant petitioner filed the present appeal. Another ground on which the condonation of delay in filing the appeal is sought is that the appellant could not file the appeal on account of want of knowledge. The appellant was represented by his counsel before the learned Civil Judge in a reference u/sec. 18 of the Act. There is no allegation that he was not informed by his counsel regarding the order of the learned Civil Judge passed on 18. 9. 81. More so, the appellant has accepted and received the entire amount of compensation alongwith interest long back. Thus, if not earlier at least he acquired the knowledge of the order dated 18. 981 on the day he received the compensation.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the appellant.

(3.) HAVING considered the application filed by the appellant seeking condonation of delay in the light of the law propounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the instant case, there is no allegation as to whether the decision of the learned Civil. Judge dated 18. 9. 81 was conveyed to the appellant by his counsel. The appellant was represented by counsel and in absence of anything contrary, the decision was made known to him when it was made by the trial Court. Till 1996 for about period of 15 long years, the appellant kept quiet and he filed the writ petition before this Court only in the year 1996. The writ petition was dismissed summarily by this Court on the ground that the petitioned had an alternative remedy. The appellant who is erstwhile Maharaja, cannot be said to have knowledge of filing an appeal in case he was aggrieved by the order dated 18. 9. 81. A bald statement that he could not file the appeal on account of want of knowledge, cannot be said to be a reasonable or satisfactory explanation for seeking condonation of inordinate delay of 5391 days. The judgments relied upon by the Learned counsel for the appellant are on different facts and situation and hence, not applicable in the instant case. The appellant has failed to show any cause muchless sufficient cause, which prevented him to file the appeal within the period of limitation. Hence, no case for condonation of inordinate delay of 5391 days is made out.