A108-year-old man in Maharashtra died just days before the Supreme Court admitted his appeal in a land dispute case that he had been pursuing since 1968. The case had remained pending before the Bombay High court for 27 years, before being dismissed in 2015.
Counsel appearing for petitioner Sopan Narsinga Gaikwad had appealed to the Supreme Court that the delay in filing the appeal against the Bombay High Court order may be viewed from the perspective that the aged man belonged to a rural area and had learned about the High Court’s verdict much later. Afterwards, the petitioner had got stuck as Covid-19 pandemic hit the country, the petitioner’s counsel Viraj Kadam added.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the plea on July 12.
“Unfortunately, the man, who pursued his case right from trial court to Supreme Court was not alive to hear that his matter has been agreed to be heard. He had expired before the court took up the matter on July 12 but the information about his demise from the rural area came just after the hearing. He will be now represented through legal heirs,” Viraj Kadam was quoted by news agency PTI.
LAND DISPUTE CASE PENDING IN BOMBAY HC FOR 27 YEARS
Sopan Narsinga Gaikwad had purchased a plot of land in 1968 through a registered sale deed. Afterwards, Gaikwad came to know that the plot of land was already mortgaged to a bank in lieu of the loan taken by the original owner.
When the original owner of the plot of land defaulted on a loan, the bank issued a notice to Gaikwad for attachment over the property.
Gaikwad then moved the trial court against the original owner and the bank, stating that he is a bona fide purchaser of the land. He sought that the bank be asked to recover the loan by selling other properties of the original owner.
The trial court accepted Gaikwad’s contention and ruled in his favor on September 10, 1982.
However, the original owner moved in the first appeal, after which the decree was reversed in 1987.
Thereafter, Gaikwad moved the Bombay High Court in the second appeal in 1988. The case remained pending before the High Court for 27 years, before being dismissed in 2015.
PLEA DISMISSED BY BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Petitioner’s counsel Vikram Kadam submitted that on August 19, 2015, the second appeal was adjourned, and, thereafter, both sets of counsel appeared before the Bombay High Court on August 22, 2015 and sought an adjournment to seek instructions.
“The Second Appeal was adjourned to September 3, 2015, but was eventually taken up on October 23, 2015 and was dismissed in default,” Kadam said.
On being asked whether the petitioner had moved a restoration application, Kadam said that they had filed an application for condonation of delay caused in filing application for restoration of Second Appeal, but it was also dismissed in February 13, 2019.
SC’s NOTICE OVER DELAY IN MOVING THE TOP COURT
A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and Hrishikesh Roy has issued a notice on the application for condonation of delay of 1,467 days and 267 days in moving the apex court against the Bombay High Court orders dated October 23, 2015 and February 13, 2019.
The Supreme Court has also sought a response from opposite parties in eight weeks.
Justice Chandrachud said, “We have to take note of the fact that the petitioner is 108-years-old and moreover the High Court had not dealt with the merit of the case and the matter was dismissed due to non-appearance of the advocates”.
The bench added that as the petitioner hailed from rural area, the lawyers concerned may not have been able to reach out to him after the case was dismissed by the Bombay High Court in 2015.
The bench also took notice of the submission made by petitioner’s counsel Vikram Kadam that the decree which was passed by the trial court was reversed by the first appellate court and the second appeal before the Bombay High Court was pending since 1988.
(With inputs from PTI)
