Himachal Pradesh High Court
OMPM/458/2026 of MAYA DEVI DECEASED THROUGH LRs Vs LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NHAI AND ORS on 29 September 2026
through LRs vs. Land Acquisition Officer & others OMP(M) No. 458 of 2026 29.09.2026 Present: Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 3. Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for the respondent No. 2. OMP(M) No.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Maya Devi (deceased) through LRs vs. Land Acquisition Officer & others OMP(M) No. 458 of 2026 29.09.2026 Present: Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 3. Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for the respondent No. 2. OMP(M) No. 458 of 2026 The instant application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 13 days in filing the appeal. It has been contended in the application that the impugned judgment was passed by the learned District Judge on 18th September, 2025. Thereafter, the certified copy of the judgment was applied on 14th November, 2025, which was supplied on 17th November, 2025. As per the case of the applicants, after obtaining the certified copy, the applicants consulted their counsel, who advised them to file an appeal before this Court. It has further been contended that before the learned Court below, Mr. Mohinder Thakur and Shri Lal Singh, Advocates, were appearing on behalf of the applicants. Thereafter, the copies which were obtained got intermingled in the office files, and because of this, the dispatch got delayed.
Thereafter, the applicants were called, and after consulting the counsel, it was decided that the instant appeal has to be filed. The delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor willful, but the same has occurred under the unavoidable circumstances. The learned counsel for the non-applicants have no objection in case the present application is allowed. Consequently, in view of the averments made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, and keeping in view the fact that the learned counsel for the non- applicants have no objection, the present application is allowed and the delay of 13 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. OMP No. 681 of 2026 For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and delay in re-filing the appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of. Arb. Appeal No.____/2026 (ARBAST No. 793 of 2026) Appeal be registered. Send for the records. List for admission alongwith Arbitration Appeal No. 506 of 2026.
(Romesh Verma) Judge September 29, 2026 (Nisha)