Back
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, HARINATH. N.
Automobile Technicians Association – Appellant
Versus
Malladi Lakshmi Narayana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Sri P. Raja Gopal Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A.No.1753 of 2008, Sri O. Manoher Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for appellant in W.A.No.1161 of 2010, Smt. Iswarya Nagula, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A.No.1162 of 2010, Sri Malladi Lakshmi Narayana, the respondent in W.A.No.1753 of 2008, W.A.No.522 of 2009 and W.A.No.125 of 2010, who is appearing as party-in-person. Sri Malladi Lakshmi Narayana has submitted written arguments which have been perused by us.
2. All these Writ Appeals are being disposed of, by way of a common Judgment, as they arise out of two separate orders of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh and raise essentially the same facts and questions of law.
3. The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation had intended to establish an automobile industrial estate at Kanuru Village, near Vijayawada, and had sought the assistance of the Government for acquiring necessary land for this purpose. The government had initiated acquisition proceedings for approximately 148 acre
Award validity under the Land Acquisition Act hinges on strict adherence to prescribed timelines, with stays influencing but not absolving time limits for passing awards.
The failure to pass the award within the two-year statutory period under the Land Acquisition Act renders the acquisition proceedings invalid, regardless of stays granted in other cases.
Once possession is taken and an award is passed, challenges to land acquisition proceedings are not maintainable, and remedies for compensation must be sought through reference proceedings.
The key legal principle established in the judgment is that the award must be made within a period of two years from the date of the publication of the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisi....
The delay in challenging acquisition proceedings and the impact on third-party rights can weigh against quashing the proceedings, even if the award has been passed beyond the stipulated period.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the acquisition proceedings lapsed as no award was made within 2 years of the declaration under Section 6 of the 1894 Act, and the State was d....
(1) Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Section 11A of 1894 Act and Section 25 of 2013 Act prescribe two different periods of limitation with adverse consequences, as on failure to make award acqu....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
