SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Kar) 594

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT, CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA
Mohan Shantanagoudar, J
Special Land Acquisition Officer, M & MIP, Gulbarga - Appellant
Versus
Rehemansab Badesab since deceased by his LRs and Another - Respondents
Miscellaneous Second Appeal No. 665 of 2011 (LAC)
Decided On : 5.12.2012

Advocates Appeared:
Sri Mallikarjun Sahukar, High Court Government Pleader, for Appellant.

Headnote:LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 - Section 23: [Mohan Shantanagoudar, J] Determination of compensation - Subject-matter involved in disputed lands had been already decided in earlier judgment for land acquired under same notification - Order of enhancement of compensation by Rs. 65,000/- per acre based on earlier judgment, was not interfered with.

       LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 - Section 54: [Mohan Shantanagoudar, J] Appeal - Condonation of delay - Delay of 3162 days on part of claimant to file appeal - Valid reasons assigned by Court while condoning delay - Claimant was not allowed interest for delayed period which caused no prejudice to State Authority - Held, Proper

JUDGMENT

Mohan Shantanagoudar, J : There is a delay of 477 days in filing the appeal. Accepting the cause shown, delay of 477 days in filing the appeal stands condoned. I.A.No.1/2012 is allowed accordingly.

2. The State has filed this appeal against the judgment and award passed in LACA No.93/2009, by which the compensation is enhanced to Rs. 65,000/- per acre.

Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the First Appellate Court was not justified in condoning the delay of about 3162 days in filing the appeal and that the First Appellate Court is not justified in enhancing the compensation to Rs. 65,000/-.

3. Valid reasons are assigned by the Court below while condoning the delay.

In the matter on hand the First Appellate Court though has condoned the delay, has rightly held that the claimant will not be entitled for interest on compensation for the delayed period. Hence no prejudice is caused to the State by condoning the delay.

4. This Court does not find any ground to interfere with the quantum of compensation awarded by the First Appellate Court. The Court below has enhanced compensation to Rs. 65,000/- based on the judgment of this Court in MFA Nos.7496/2006 and 7498/2006. The lands in question are acquired under the very notification, which was the subject matter in MFA No.7496/2006 and MFA No.7498/2006. Thus, the claimant is entitled to the compensation of Rs. 65,000/- per acre. Since the judgment of the First Appellate Court is just and proper, no interference is called for. Appeal fails and the same stands dismissed.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top